Choosing to abandon HD-DVD for time advantage is Microsoft's biggest mistake. They had a chance to set de-facto standard for future HD movies with first player on market and screw up Sony, but they were enough stupid to fuck that up.
If they fail to sell more with price-wars scheme at PS3 launch, it's over (Sony wins).
ATAPI is basic IDE interface driver. But what about raw data which atapi driver gets? Something must understand that part, and there comes specific driver.
It's too late here. Actually ATAPI driver is lowest level driver, reading/writing directly from/to IDE hardware ports.
ATAPI is basic IDE interface driver. But what about raw data which atapi driver gets? Something must understand that part, and there comes specific driver.
Microsoft is free to put HD-DVD players int xbox, as well as Sony is allowed to put in Blue-Ray. But it is not very clean anti-competitive practice to discriminate hardware support in general purpose operating system so only one novel format is natively supported.
If blue-ray drives become available soon, there is no reason not to have certified drivers for 'em bundled with Vista, if same criteria applies to HD-DVD.
It is probably just untrue rumour. Although current government is unlikely to sue Microsoft, the evil empire is IMHO still reluctant to risk another antitrust case.
With such unreserved support for HD-DVD (instead of "whichever format prevails" stance), it must be because large money invested in xbox360 is at stake.
It isn't copyright which is questionable part of US business, nor their right to protect it (or seek protection);
Problem is USA tries to proactively protect IP by using software patents, and even tries to enforce patents(and laws like DMCA) outside of it's borders (preventing infringing companies from doing business in USA even if it isn't connected to actual "infringement", or arresting people for doing something what is legal in their countries). For every sane person copyright is more than enough to protect software. Important is what happened in Europe, it was the turning point of sw patents not only in Europe, but in the whole world. Directive was, luckily, rejected because public didn't buy the patent hype, but rebelled. If it was accepted, many world countries would probably follow.
US patent office grants trivial patents, not because they are incompetent, but because it is a policy with a goal to prevent non-US companies from competing, even if they are fully capable. And since most other countries don't implement anything simmilar, US patent holders can compete there, while domestic companies can't compete back in US because of patent law. This is called protectionism. Hopefully, it isn't working. See Creative vs. Apple case which is coming. Shitty US patent directives used directly against US company, it is the only way current situation can ever be changed. Since many foreign companies care to file patents in USA system, it's primary purpose(keeping tech advantage) is obstructed.
Similar bull**it happens with drug patents and/or patenting genome. Can you imagine, hepatitis C genome (created by natural evolution, not some research group) is patented by US company, so noone is allowed (without paying a license) to use it to develop drugs/detection methods/vaccines! Obviously, greed is what describes US legislators.
I was already concerned with military exports being as big as whole US economy:)
10 Billion isn't a big sum, I'd expect it to be much more (US military budget is >40 times as big). If it wasn't for those arab marionettes, whole sum would be miserable.
That "we" is really arrogant. RIAA don't represent whole USA, although mentality and arrogance of G.W.Bush is on the same level.
And Russia is not another piece of cake state, it is still a great power. They don't give a pi** about USA nor some non-government organisation like RIAA. No one can dictate anything to them. Who cares about US-dictated WTO these days, anyway?
OK, but one important point here: you can't afford (time,memory) to let runtime compiler optimize java bytecode as long as you can with C++-like compiler.
Besides there's garbage collector, boundary checking, while you don't usually have that with C++ apps.
Of course, C++ is dated and for today's standards somewhat poorly designed language(bitness and endinaness problems e.g.). "D" is a nice idea (as logical step forward in that language branch), but I don't think we will ever see it become popular.
I'm not bashing Java and similar platforms/languages, they are very nice solution for many areas, but not performance critical applications where every bit of speed is important.
Funny. C++ is native language with very good performance, while Java and friends are here only because of simplicity of deployment and standard platform.
Eventually you can develop extensions which will fully or mostly replace old ones, but keep those for supporting legacy apps. At that point it is best to announce new version of protocol.
I don't know why they don't use minor, compatible versions of protocol, OpenGL-like scheme.
Many ubiquitous extensions could be defined as a standard that way.
Fortunately move to X-org changed that a bit. Many efforts to repair mistakes from the past are undergoing in that project. As I read related mailing lists regularly, I can tell.
Examples: xevie, xcb, xserver, exa, Xgl (experimental), DRI graphic memory management, mesa OpenGL improvements (related in some way to graphic memory management), legacy VGA administration efforts, etc.
99%? Are you sure? Try using generic vesa driver and see how "fast" it is.
It isn't all about drivers. It's also about general architecture improvement, meaning with new driver core (currently only experimental) you will be able to use fast hardware accelerated composite extension. There are also other numerous "under th hood" improvements (brand new MESA for example)and most importantly modularisation of the whole project.
Personally I feel that parallel relase of monolithic/modular version wasn't necessary. Much work implemented into something that won't be relevant in 6 months with modular-only 7.1.
There isn't a technical reason to do so.
When it comes to radio-wave spectrum, malicious user can obstruct communication and broadcasting.
Internet (IP address) user is much more limited in that way. Global regulation isn't needed,
there are already laws in place protecting hosts from attacks.
Otherwise US doesn't represent a majority of internet (no more) and if that country tends to lock themselves out, noone else will care much.
Why shouldn't we? If they market you flat rate, you are supposed to have flat rate.
Not the "fair use" shit. Like if marketing flat rate (=selling lies) is fair to users.
New graphic driver model is somewhat similar to DRI.
Most complex part of driver is in userspace, while "miniport" driver is in kernel space. That way performance loss is minimal. Now, LDDM (graphic part) also extends this to include GPU scheduling and memory management, all needed for new graphic engine.It's purpose is GPU multitasking and memory sharing between tasks using hw accelerated stuff, including window manager(avalon) and it's compositing manager.
Something similar is proposed for DRI (only for memory management for now), which would enable things like XGL with offscreen hw accelerated compositing in graphic card memory. XGL still needs mode setting stuff, implementation of which is proposed to be in separate library. There's also problem of linux framebuffer integration with all this.
On top of DRI or LDDM driver come libraries like direct3D or OpenGL.
It was told that when running custom ICD, 3D accelerated shell would stop and instead use old one (XP-like). Unimportant for full screen apps, bit more important for windowed ones (you don't get fancy widgets and effects while running GL application).
"in fact pretty much all the Windows sysadmins I know (including myself) use the Windows command line on a regular basis."
Poor you. Windows command line interface is awful DOS-like hybrid. After unix shell experience I can't but hate it. Monad might bring some light, I hope.
1. You can't know it's code. Maybe google decides for a massive rewrite.
2. Exactly. It will have means to disable it, but will be on by default. Sort of spyware, but possibly anonymous kind.
3. Why is giving away source (protected by OSS license from abuse) a bad move? Remember, Apple has open source browser and it doesn't change anything. Browser is a commodity software today.
They can't actually. Try to break into PGP. Practically impossible with e.g. 256-bit private key, except if they find weakness in algorithm (unlikely in a short period).
Many encryption types are, in fact, unbreakable, except by brute force in 10^18 years or so.
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
Here in Europe we still use, properly, 10^12.
Choosing to abandon HD-DVD for time advantage is Microsoft's biggest mistake. They had a chance to set de-facto standard for future HD movies with first player on market and screw up Sony, but they were enough stupid to fuck that up. If they fail to sell more with price-wars scheme at PS3 launch, it's over (Sony wins).
ATAPI is basic IDE interface driver. But what about raw data which atapi driver gets? Something must understand that part, and there comes specific driver.
Microsoft is free to put HD-DVD players int xbox, as well as Sony is allowed to put in Blue-Ray. But it is not very clean anti-competitive practice to discriminate hardware support in general purpose operating system so only one novel format is natively supported.
If blue-ray drives become available soon, there is no reason not to have certified drivers for 'em bundled with Vista, if same criteria applies to HD-DVD.
It is probably just untrue rumour. Although current government is unlikely to sue Microsoft, the evil empire is IMHO still reluctant to risk another antitrust case.
With such unreserved support for HD-DVD (instead of "whichever format prevails" stance), it must be because large money invested in xbox360 is at stake.
It isn't copyright which is questionable part of US business, nor their right to protect it (or seek protection);
Problem is USA tries to proactively protect IP by using software patents, and even tries to enforce patents(and laws like DMCA) outside of it's borders (preventing infringing companies from doing business in USA even if it isn't connected to actual "infringement", or arresting people for doing something what is legal in their countries). For every sane person copyright is more than enough to protect software. Important is what happened in Europe, it was the turning point of sw patents not only in Europe, but in the whole world. Directive was, luckily, rejected because public didn't buy the patent hype, but rebelled. If it was accepted, many world countries would probably follow.
US patent office grants trivial patents, not because they are incompetent, but because it is a policy with a goal to prevent non-US companies from competing, even if they are fully capable. And since most other countries don't implement anything simmilar, US patent holders can compete there, while domestic companies can't compete back in US because of patent law. This is called protectionism. Hopefully, it isn't working. See Creative vs. Apple case which is coming. Shitty US patent directives used directly against US company, it is the only way current situation can ever be changed. Since many foreign companies care to file patents in USA system, it's primary purpose(keeping tech advantage) is obstructed.
Similar bull**it happens with drug patents and/or patenting genome. Can you imagine, hepatitis C genome (created by natural evolution, not some research group) is patented by US company, so noone is allowed (without paying a license) to use it to develop drugs/detection methods/vaccines! Obviously, greed is what describes US legislators.
I was already concerned with military exports being as big as whole US economy :)
10 Billion isn't a big sum, I'd expect it to be much more (US military budget is >40 times as big). If it wasn't for those arab marionettes, whole sum would be miserable.
That "we" is really arrogant. RIAA don't represent whole USA, although mentality and arrogance of G.W.Bush is on the same level. And Russia is not another piece of cake state, it is still a great power. They don't give a pi** about USA nor some non-government organisation like RIAA. No one can dictate anything to them. Who cares about US-dictated WTO these days, anyway?
OK, but one important point here: you can't afford (time,memory) to let runtime compiler optimize java bytecode as long as you can with C++-like compiler. Besides there's garbage collector, boundary checking, while you don't usually have that with C++ apps. Of course, C++ is dated and for today's standards somewhat poorly designed language(bitness and endinaness problems e.g.). "D" is a nice idea (as logical step forward in that language branch), but I don't think we will ever see it become popular. I'm not bashing Java and similar platforms/languages, they are very nice solution for many areas, but not performance critical applications where every bit of speed is important.
Funny. C++ is native language with very good performance, while Java and friends are here only because of simplicity of deployment and standard platform.
Then EU is right. MS wanted to play and released outdated, incomplete documentation. Now they will pay.
I haven't checked it. But it is simple to do 'lm -s X11R7 X11R6', if you have only 7 on the system, isn't it? It is after all a 6.9 release as well.
Eventually you can develop extensions which will fully or mostly replace old ones, but keep those for supporting legacy apps. At that point it is best to announce new version of protocol. I don't know why they don't use minor, compatible versions of protocol, OpenGL-like scheme. Many ubiquitous extensions could be defined as a standard that way.
Fortunately move to X-org changed that a bit. Many efforts to repair mistakes from the past are undergoing in that project. As I read related mailing lists regularly, I can tell. Examples: xevie, xcb, xserver, exa, Xgl (experimental), DRI graphic memory management, mesa OpenGL improvements (related in some way to graphic memory management), legacy VGA administration efforts, etc.
99%? Are you sure? Try using generic vesa driver and see how "fast" it is. It isn't all about drivers. It's also about general architecture improvement, meaning with new driver core (currently only experimental) you will be able to use fast hardware accelerated composite extension. There are also other numerous "under th hood" improvements (brand new MESA for example)and most importantly modularisation of the whole project. Personally I feel that parallel relase of monolithic/modular version wasn't necessary. Much work implemented into something that won't be relevant in 6 months with modular-only 7.1.
There isn't a technical reason to do so. When it comes to radio-wave spectrum, malicious user can obstruct communication and broadcasting. Internet (IP address) user is much more limited in that way. Global regulation isn't needed, there are already laws in place protecting hosts from attacks. Otherwise US doesn't represent a majority of internet (no more) and if that country tends to lock themselves out, noone else will care much.
Why shouldn't we? If they market you flat rate, you are supposed to have flat rate. Not the "fair use" shit. Like if marketing flat rate (=selling lies) is fair to users.
New graphic driver model is somewhat similar to DRI. Most complex part of driver is in userspace, while "miniport" driver is in kernel space. That way performance loss is minimal. Now, LDDM (graphic part) also extends this to include GPU scheduling and memory management, all needed for new graphic engine.It's purpose is GPU multitasking and memory sharing between tasks using hw accelerated stuff, including window manager(avalon) and it's compositing manager. Something similar is proposed for DRI (only for memory management for now), which would enable things like XGL with offscreen hw accelerated compositing in graphic card memory. XGL still needs mode setting stuff, implementation of which is proposed to be in separate library. There's also problem of linux framebuffer integration with all this. On top of DRI or LDDM driver come libraries like direct3D or OpenGL.
It was told that when running custom ICD, 3D accelerated shell would stop and instead use old one (XP-like). Unimportant for full screen apps, bit more important for windowed ones (you don't get fancy widgets and effects while running GL application).
1. You can't know it's code. Maybe google decides for a massive rewrite. 2. Exactly. It will have means to disable it, but will be on by default. Sort of spyware, but possibly anonymous kind. 3. Why is giving away source (protected by OSS license from abuse) a bad move? Remember, Apple has open source browser and it doesn't change anything. Browser is a commodity software today.
What exactly does music industry have from email logs and internet connection logs?
They can't actually. Try to break into PGP. Practically impossible with e.g. 256-bit private key, except if they find weakness in algorithm (unlikely in a short period). Many encryption types are, in fact, unbreakable, except by brute force in 10^18 years or so.
If java is outdated, then what is C/C++?