Yeah, that would be funny considering OpenBSD is largely irrelevent nowadays. It would be like him contacting the Plan9 or Hurd developers for a deal like this.
I know you're all just outraged over this, but really your opinions and choices are meaningless.
Companies who _pay_ Novell/Redhat for Linux, as opposed to a bunch of dirty hippies who think everything should be free, will be quite happy about the prospect of friendlier relations with Microsoft and better interoperability with MS operating systems and applications.
Ergo, neither Novell nor Redhat care about your pithy quips at "M$/MicroShaft/Whatever"'s expense.
He's not a conservative, he's a fundamentalist. i.e. "the enemy". After extremist foreign terrorists are wiped out, it's going to be a tooth and nails fight with our homegrown funamentalist nutbags, and it's going to be a dirty fight.
You could have just used an old boarding pass or copied an old one, or scanned and photoshopped an old boarding pass and changed the date/time.
Or, gee, the terrorists could just have someone else buy a plane ticket, or buy it themselves, or buy for a different flight, whatever.
The whole thing is ridiculous. It's ridiculous that this is thought to be some newly discovered weakness, and it's ridiculous that the powers that be are actually getting upset over it.
Untrue. The quality of the electronics (DA converter and other components) will have a huge effect on sound quality. Particularly noise floor, frequency response, etc...
Wow, I didn't know they trained chimpanzees to do anything other than throw their own shit. Apparently they've trained you to bang on the keyboard and make what appear to be sentences (at first glance).
I've determined that you're a troll. Nobody else would use these boring old communist propoganda arguments that you're positing.
Good troll, though, you got a few of us. On the other hand, we do need people who really think like you pretend to so they can produce free stuff for us. Maybe I should start spouting such inane rhetoric so I can inspire people to go out and toil in the fields (or on the keyboard) instead of actually living a normal life so I can get free shit. I have no issue taking advantage of dumb people.
Wow, talk about begging the question. You seem to be basing your argument on the "fact" that it's not ethical for someone to spend time and money developing a piece of software, then sell it. This premise is simply wrong. All of your "arguments", which spring from this falsehood, are therefore wrong.
In short, you have no point.
Nonsense. You think the idea of offloading work (and video decoding in particular) from the CPU to dedicated addin cards wasn't around in 1997? This is an obvious idea, and there are numerous other "timeshifting" patents that have been granted before 1997.
Dude, give up. I read this thread, you've been pwnt in every way. Your arguments are silly.
If you're going to use silly little dictionary definitions, fine. By that definition it was propaganda. However, by that definition there's nothing wrong with propaganda. Every piece of information ever published repeatedly by someone with an opinion is "propaganda".
Yawn, more uninformed, vague railing agains the big, bad DRM wolf.
This is nonsense. DRM is a capability, nobody but the content providers will force you to use it. If you don't want to watch the latest Brittney Spears video on your PC, it won't affect you. If a content provider (e.g. Sony) implements onerous DRM then don't buy the content or complain to Sony. Bad DRM is already out there, Vista just makes it easier for the content provider and easier for the end-user since they don't have to deal with 10 different kinds of DRM.
You have to hand it to AMD, they had quite a run and will continue to be successful, though not so wildly as before now that Intel has caught up with their NGMA.
Expect Intel to take share back in the 2P and below market (largest market) while AMD will hold onto their lead in the 4P market until at least early next year, and possibly a while longer due to the technical superiority of their HT-based interconnect. Conroe and Woodcrest are undeniably the better uarch's, but when you start scaling to more CPUs the interconnect becomes more and more important.
It's impressive, to say the least, than Intel has managed to make Conroe perform so well without an integrated memory controller. A lot of uninformed fanboys will claim they "cheated" by using so much cache, but there's no cheating in the microprocessor field and even the 2M Allendale units with less cache have stellar performance. I can't wait for them to come out with their next gen chips with CSI and an integrated memory controller, those will be stunning perforers in all sectors.
Yes, Intel will with certainty take back some market share in the 2P and 1P (4 core and 2 core, respectively) market with Woodcrest. Their performance benefit will degrade somewhat in 4P servers since they're still using a FSB design, but overall that's a fairly small part of the market. To be competitive there they'll need to move to their next gen interconnect, CSI.
Of course there's a reason - they can all break when Microsoft makes changes. That's the reason they're called 'API', genius. They're intended to be used by application programmers. Internal calls are subject to change at any time.
Oh, wait. That's exactly what happened. Vendor used undocumented, unsupported interfaces which got changed.
So either your argument is that Microsoft can't change its OS, or your argument doesn't exist. Which is it?
OK, I agree with your assessment. This developer used an interface that has changed. Per your argument, wtf are they complaining about then?
This company is on their own, but they expect Microsoft to continue supporting this older interface. There's some kind of logical disconnect here, I think.
They're not locking anybody out. It's silly to think that developers should have full access to every single internal structure or API call. It's called "bad design principle". It means they can't change things internally.
The real problem may just be limitations in the API they _ARE_ providing. That's fine, work with them on it. Don't whine that their internal structures and kernel level calls are changing - you are NOT supposed to use those anyway.
They are basically saying that they want the existing weak kernel model to continue to be supported because at least it allows them to do things they way they have been for a long time.
This is, of course, stupid. It's like my locksmith not wanting me to get a new door because his equipment won't work with it, even if the new door theoretically provides the basis for better security long-term.
I'm not saying the new intercept model is great, I'm saying the answer isn't "leave it like it was". Instead of whining, why don't they engage Microsoft and figure out what exactly they need. Regardless of what your average wanker things, Microsoft will NOT be in a good situation if Vista turns out to be a dud security-wise. They want it to work.
Untrue. A 7600GT or even a 7900GT card will run any 3 year old game (and most current games up to 1280x1024) just fine, and they really don't run all that hot. The ATI cards, which perform better, are pigs though.
And this is how you know it's ridiculous to make laws like anti-trust apply to intellectual property. If you find yourself asking questions like this, the law/policy is idiotic.
I encode some of my movies to x264, which is multi-threaded. It currently takes about 8 hours for a single movie. A quad core where each core is 50% faster than my current one could cut that time down to 2-3 hours.
What is this, 1994? You can't add freaking cache expansion slots anymore, the latency is so much higher now. Back in the day everything was so slow it didn't matter. Try putting L2 cache anywhere but right on the chip nowadays and it's pointless.
Pfft. Right. That's like me punching my wife in the face so she thinks I'm super sweet when I don't scratch my balls in front of her family.
In other words, they're not retards. Releasing something of subpar quality is bad publicity. Bad publicity is bad publicity regardless of what happens later.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, that would be funny considering OpenBSD is largely irrelevent nowadays. It would be like him contacting the Plan9 or Hurd developers for a deal like this.
I know you're all just outraged over this, but really your opinions and choices are meaningless. Companies who _pay_ Novell/Redhat for Linux, as opposed to a bunch of dirty hippies who think everything should be free, will be quite happy about the prospect of friendlier relations with Microsoft and better interoperability with MS operating systems and applications. Ergo, neither Novell nor Redhat care about your pithy quips at "M$/MicroShaft/Whatever"'s expense.
He's not a conservative, he's a fundamentalist. i.e. "the enemy". After extremist foreign terrorists are wiped out, it's going to be a tooth and nails fight with our homegrown funamentalist nutbags, and it's going to be a dirty fight.
Or, gee, the terrorists could just have someone else buy a plane ticket, or buy it themselves, or buy for a different flight, whatever.
The whole thing is ridiculous. It's ridiculous that this is thought to be some newly discovered weakness, and it's ridiculous that the powers that be are actually getting upset over it.
Untrue. The quality of the electronics (DA converter and other components) will have a huge effect on sound quality. Particularly noise floor, frequency response, etc...
Want a cookie, chimp?
Good troll, though, you got a few of us. On the other hand, we do need people who really think like you pretend to so they can produce free stuff for us. Maybe I should start spouting such inane rhetoric so I can inspire people to go out and toil in the fields (or on the keyboard) instead of actually living a normal life so I can get free shit. I have no issue taking advantage of dumb people.
Wow, talk about begging the question. You seem to be basing your argument on the "fact" that it's not ethical for someone to spend time and money developing a piece of software, then sell it. This premise is simply wrong. All of your "arguments", which spring from this falsehood, are therefore wrong. In short, you have no point.
asdasd asdasd as dad asdads a
Absolutely false. TV cards have been around since the early 90's at least.
Nonsense. You think the idea of offloading work (and video decoding in particular) from the CPU to dedicated addin cards wasn't around in 1997? This is an obvious idea, and there are numerous other "timeshifting" patents that have been granted before 1997.
Dude, give up. I read this thread, you've been pwnt in every way. Your arguments are silly. If you're going to use silly little dictionary definitions, fine. By that definition it was propaganda. However, by that definition there's nothing wrong with propaganda. Every piece of information ever published repeatedly by someone with an opinion is "propaganda".
Yawn, more uninformed, vague railing agains the big, bad DRM wolf. This is nonsense. DRM is a capability, nobody but the content providers will force you to use it. If you don't want to watch the latest Brittney Spears video on your PC, it won't affect you. If a content provider (e.g. Sony) implements onerous DRM then don't buy the content or complain to Sony. Bad DRM is already out there, Vista just makes it easier for the content provider and easier for the end-user since they don't have to deal with 10 different kinds of DRM.
Expect Intel to take share back in the 2P and below market (largest market) while AMD will hold onto their lead in the 4P market until at least early next year, and possibly a while longer due to the technical superiority of their HT-based interconnect. Conroe and Woodcrest are undeniably the better uarch's, but when you start scaling to more CPUs the interconnect becomes more and more important.
It's impressive, to say the least, than Intel has managed to make Conroe perform so well without an integrated memory controller. A lot of uninformed fanboys will claim they "cheated" by using so much cache, but there's no cheating in the microprocessor field and even the 2M Allendale units with less cache have stellar performance. I can't wait for them to come out with their next gen chips with CSI and an integrated memory controller, those will be stunning perforers in all sectors.
Yes, Intel will with certainty take back some market share in the 2P and 1P (4 core and 2 core, respectively) market with Woodcrest. Their performance benefit will degrade somewhat in 4P servers since they're still using a FSB design, but overall that's a fairly small part of the market. To be competitive there they'll need to move to their next gen interconnect, CSI.
Oh, wait. That's exactly what happened. Vendor used undocumented, unsupported interfaces which got changed.
So either your argument is that Microsoft can't change its OS, or your argument doesn't exist. Which is it?
Non sequitur. Do you think Windows Office and Windows live install kernel hooks? This is unrelated to the topic at hand, please try to keep up.
This company is on their own, but they expect Microsoft to continue supporting this older interface. There's some kind of logical disconnect here, I think.
The real problem may just be limitations in the API they _ARE_ providing. That's fine, work with them on it. Don't whine that their internal structures and kernel level calls are changing - you are NOT supposed to use those anyway.
They are basically saying that they want the existing weak kernel model to continue to be supported because at least it allows them to do things they way they have been for a long time. This is, of course, stupid. It's like my locksmith not wanting me to get a new door because his equipment won't work with it, even if the new door theoretically provides the basis for better security long-term.
I'm not saying the new intercept model is great, I'm saying the answer isn't "leave it like it was". Instead of whining, why don't they engage Microsoft and figure out what exactly they need. Regardless of what your average wanker things, Microsoft will NOT be in a good situation if Vista turns out to be a dud security-wise. They want it to work.
Untrue. A 7600GT or even a 7900GT card will run any 3 year old game (and most current games up to 1280x1024) just fine, and they really don't run all that hot. The ATI cards, which perform better, are pigs though.
And this is how you know it's ridiculous to make laws like anti-trust apply to intellectual property. If you find yourself asking questions like this, the law/policy is idiotic.
I encode some of my movies to x264, which is multi-threaded. It currently takes about 8 hours for a single movie. A quad core where each core is 50% faster than my current one could cut that time down to 2-3 hours.
What is this, 1994? You can't add freaking cache expansion slots anymore, the latency is so much higher now. Back in the day everything was so slow it didn't matter. Try putting L2 cache anywhere but right on the chip nowadays and it's pointless.
In other words, they're not retards. Releasing something of subpar quality is bad publicity. Bad publicity is bad publicity regardless of what happens later.