Rolf. We won't need it since we already have smartphones and pda phones that play wma/v, both DRMd and not DRMd, transferrable from your pc (or maybe mac, but who cares!) via an included cradle. Oh, transferrable to an sd card, of which you can carry many. And it's funny you should bring up DRM, since Apple's DRM is much nastier than MSFT's. Let's check it out!
MSFT's is open (encryption); they aren't trying to use it to corner the market on downloaded music.
MSFT's is open (playback); they aren't trying to use it to corner the market on portable music devices.
MSFT 2, Apple 0.
Oh... MSFT 3, Apple 0 because every iTunes customer I've ever met had no idea they couldn't move their music around. Way to go misleading your customers AGAIN, Apple. Remember when PPC was faster than x86? Holy cow, neither do I!!! But I'm sure Apple customers do.
Verizon's the best carrier in the US, and they rejected a stupid phone that came with a bunch of rules that would have been bad for them and their customers. I have no doubt that apple fanpeople will eat up the phone, but I don't think the hype is enough to carry a non-fanperson all the way through buying a 500$ phone that is about the same size as the new Samsung (and probably other companies') PDA phones, yet doesn't have real pda functionality, integration with things that matter (mine is 2 years old and handles exchange, secure imap and smtp, has picsel, a great browser which samsung quietly distributes, and which apple I'm sure would devote an entire SHOW to since they have such limited resources that creating such a thing would feel like a big deal to them), a keyboard, 3g networking, 3rd party programs, sd slot? (Not sure...). It's not a good fit for a Verizon or Sprint, since they're serious carriers. Cingular is perfect for the iPhone. T-Mobile, too.
I mean, telling everyone a product you're releasing into a market that has generally been considered the highest of high tech for the last 5 years, then actually using 'High Technology' as the 4th bullet point on the front of the box and all your advertising is pretty stupid. I think the Verizon decision makers probably played out a sales scenerio in their heads between one of their reps and someone like me (I'd imagine a fairly typical Verizon customer), realized it made them look like idiots ("But but, it's HIGH techNOLOGY!!") and decided they'd let the kiddie carriers deal with the kiddie customers.
Are you serious? Some of us actually prefer to play bright, cartoony games that are fun over Gears or {insert decent game for ps3 when one comes out}. If nintendo would have just made AA easier (I assume it's hard to do on the Wii since ALL the games have bad jaggies), the wii would be THE perfect console for me. I don't care about poly count or texture detail. Just adds distraction and realism which, after all, aren't we trying to avoid by playing a game to begin with? If I want real, I'll roll up the screen and wash all the dishes in the kitchen sink behind it =[.
Yeah, this guy's a moron. It sends ONE anonymous opt-out request referring the spammer to bluesecurity's website per email received from that spammer. It's a JSBWYSM attack... that's Just Sending Back What You Sent Me attack...
God finally. I was about to post the same deal. ALSO, Blue Security's software is only supposed to send ONE anonymous opt-out (has no email addr, soas not to verify, but refers them to bluesecurity's website) per spam received by the user who installed it. That means it's just a quick opt-out generation tool, not a DoS tool. What's it mean when the spammers themselves say that when all the people they send spam to choose to opt out, it's a DoS attack? rolfenstein
I'm pretty sure if email had been around when all those fun little phrases were being coined, there would be one that went like this, "Don't start what you can't finish, newbz."
I think the barriers to entry into the open source world are good and should be present in getting into computing in general. Honesty, all the knowledge I need to be a capable *BSD admin and reasonably adept linux power user doesn't take up much space in my head and didn't take more than a few hundred hours to pick up. In the 5 or so years since, I've been able to make better use of PCs and similar tools in pursuit of non-tech endeavors. In fact, I'm POSITIVE I've saved myself mmore than a few hundred hours of sitting around waiting for someone else to tell me what to do/how to do it/how to fix my machine, networking, etc...
It's worth it for everyone to go through that initial furstrating time that will earn them a lifetime of independence from support and improved productivity. I don't think people should make it TOO easy for others to get into open source. Look at what apple did. Tried to make it super easy, and now we have a bunch of momrons who think they know how to use a computer asking stupid questions and generally being the most annoying time drain ever.
That's pretty elite then. Still, when people see a 100k price tag on something that half the slashdot responders don't understand, it's difficult to pitch it to the non-technical people who, you know, control the money =]. If it handles failover even close to decently, then it'd easily save my company 40k/year across just 8 servers. We could probably also reduce the number of servers by 20% and end up with MORE wiggle room than we've currently got. Just find a way to make goofballs understand that it's sort of the inverse type of virtualization (distribution) from what everyone is thinking about right now (consolidation)...
If they managed to make it relatively transparent it'd be neat, but there are probably all sorts of limits on the type of classes and such that can run on the virtualization layer (which covers multiple pieces of hardware, no?), like that they be serializable and implement some special form of runnable... If that's the case, I'd expect to find this at sourceforge for free =].
Slashdot Mirror
MSFT's is open (encryption); they aren't trying to use it to corner the market on downloaded music.
MSFT's is open (playback); they aren't trying to use it to corner the market on portable music devices.
MSFT 2, Apple 0.
Oh... MSFT 3, Apple 0 because every iTunes customer I've ever met had no idea they couldn't move their music around. Way to go misleading your customers AGAIN, Apple. Remember when PPC was faster than x86? Holy cow, neither do I!!! But I'm sure Apple customers do.
I mean, telling everyone a product you're releasing into a market that has generally been considered the highest of high tech for the last 5 years, then actually using 'High Technology' as the 4th bullet point on the front of the box and all your advertising is pretty stupid. I think the Verizon decision makers probably played out a sales scenerio in their heads between one of their reps and someone like me (I'd imagine a fairly typical Verizon customer), realized it made them look like idiots ("But but, it's HIGH techNOLOGY!!") and decided they'd let the kiddie carriers deal with the kiddie customers.
eff ell aim!
Are you serious? Some of us actually prefer to play bright, cartoony games that are fun over Gears or {insert decent game for ps3 when one comes out}. If nintendo would have just made AA easier (I assume it's hard to do on the Wii since ALL the games have bad jaggies), the wii would be THE perfect console for me. I don't care about poly count or texture detail. Just adds distraction and realism which, after all, aren't we trying to avoid by playing a game to begin with? If I want real, I'll roll up the screen and wash all the dishes in the kitchen sink behind it =[.
Yeah, this guy's a moron. It sends ONE anonymous opt-out request referring the spammer to bluesecurity's website per email received from that spammer. It's a JSBWYSM attack... that's Just Sending Back What You Sent Me attack...
God finally. I was about to post the same deal. ALSO, Blue Security's software is only supposed to send ONE anonymous opt-out (has no email addr, soas not to verify, but refers them to bluesecurity's website) per spam received by the user who installed it. That means it's just a quick opt-out generation tool, not a DoS tool. What's it mean when the spammers themselves say that when all the people they send spam to choose to opt out, it's a DoS attack? rolfenstein I'm pretty sure if email had been around when all those fun little phrases were being coined, there would be one that went like this, "Don't start what you can't finish, newbz."
I think the barriers to entry into the open source world are good and should be present in getting into computing in general. Honesty, all the knowledge I need to be a capable *BSD admin and reasonably adept linux power user doesn't take up much space in my head and didn't take more than a few hundred hours to pick up. In the 5 or so years since, I've been able to make better use of PCs and similar tools in pursuit of non-tech endeavors. In fact, I'm POSITIVE I've saved myself mmore than a few hundred hours of sitting around waiting for someone else to tell me what to do/how to do it/how to fix my machine, networking, etc... It's worth it for everyone to go through that initial furstrating time that will earn them a lifetime of independence from support and improved productivity. I don't think people should make it TOO easy for others to get into open source. Look at what apple did. Tried to make it super easy, and now we have a bunch of momrons who think they know how to use a computer asking stupid questions and generally being the most annoying time drain ever.
That's pretty elite then. Still, when people see a 100k price tag on something that half the slashdot responders don't understand, it's difficult to pitch it to the non-technical people who, you know, control the money =]. If it handles failover even close to decently, then it'd easily save my company 40k/year across just 8 servers. We could probably also reduce the number of servers by 20% and end up with MORE wiggle room than we've currently got. Just find a way to make goofballs understand that it's sort of the inverse type of virtualization (distribution) from what everyone is thinking about right now (consolidation)...
If they managed to make it relatively transparent it'd be neat, but there are probably all sorts of limits on the type of classes and such that can run on the virtualization layer (which covers multiple pieces of hardware, no?), like that they be serializable and implement some special form of runnable... If that's the case, I'd expect to find this at sourceforge for free =].