The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
[URL]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4270449.stm[/URL]
Some good news then, hopefully it'll make a difference.
Some good news then, hopefully it'll make a difference.
Page:
Just quickly, for anyone who is interested, the Internet Explorer team have got their own blog: [URL]http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/[/URL]
Garin wrote:
> We should remember that Palladium (its called NGSCB these days) is
> not the same as TCPA. Microsoft are quite adament that requiring
> licencing/certification from them or anybody else wont be necessary.
>
> However its going to be a major blow to projects to such as Mono and
> Wine I think if applications start being updated to use NGSCB.
Indeed, so step down all you l0l M$ sU><0rZ people.
That said, I don't know how they think TCPA is going to work without signed code, without it the entire premise that TCPA is built upon falls apart. I stress that I haven't really been followed the development of trusted computing since I wrote my dissertation on it almost two years ago, so things could have changed markedly.
> We should remember that Palladium (its called NGSCB these days) is
> not the same as TCPA. Microsoft are quite adament that requiring
> licencing/certification from them or anybody else wont be necessary.
>
> However its going to be a major blow to projects to such as Mono and
> Wine I think if applications start being updated to use NGSCB.
Indeed, so step down all you l0l M$ sU><0rZ people.
That said, I don't know how they think TCPA is going to work without signed code, without it the entire premise that TCPA is built upon falls apart. I stress that I haven't really been followed the development of trusted computing since I wrote my dissertation on it almost two years ago, so things could have changed markedly.
Miserableman wrote:
> Palladium (or more relevantly, the hardware platform it is built on)
> is a threat to the Open Source movement because all code that takes
> advantage of trusted computing must be signed, which costs money.
We should remember that Palladium (its called NGSCB these days) is not the same as TCPA. Microsoft are quite adament that requiring licencing/certification from them or anybody else wont be necessary.
However its going to be a major blow to projects to such as Mono and Wine I think if applications start being updated to use NGSCB.
> Palladium (or more relevantly, the hardware platform it is built on)
> is a threat to the Open Source movement because all code that takes
> advantage of trusted computing must be signed, which costs money.
We should remember that Palladium (its called NGSCB these days) is not the same as TCPA. Microsoft are quite adament that requiring licencing/certification from them or anybody else wont be necessary.
However its going to be a major blow to projects to such as Mono and Wine I think if applications start being updated to use NGSCB.
It sounds like a good system, but flawed due to its owner. If a non-profit organization was in charge, it'll be better received. Updates will still take longer than usual to rollout though, as the signature has to be verified first, right?
Palladium (or more relevantly, the hardware platform it is built on) is a threat to the Open Source movement because all code that takes advantage of trusted computing must be signed, which costs money. Changing and recompiling that code will require a new signature to be generated. If it becomes ubiquitous to use the TCPA platform to do mundane things like watch a movie or use internet banking, then Open Source software will be force to keep up. The way things stand at the moment this will certainly sink endeavours such as Firefox's nightly builds, and will make it considerably more expensive and less beneficial to develop Open Source software.
Not entirely sure either, just read a document on it few weeks ago. What I got out of it was that it was more privacy and security based more than a detriment to open source.
(In reply to the thing about palladium)
I think it does.
Unless my understanding of it (from what I remember) is it prevents unauthorised code from being run on the chip, therefore open-source would be screwed because the community would need to pay for a lisence etc etc.
Correct me if i'm wrong though, which I most likely am.
I think it does.
Unless my understanding of it (from what I remember) is it prevents unauthorised code from being run on the chip, therefore open-source would be screwed because the community would need to pay for a lisence etc etc.
Correct me if i'm wrong though, which I most likely am.
gamesfreak wrote:
> It's not a bad operating system to be honest, there is a lot of
> support for it, it's just there is too much stuff hidden away from
> us.
Not really, again you'll find it's application specific, and there's a whole bevy of tutorials and guides on the web on the more hidden parts of XP.
> "Do you want to send this error report to Microsoft" etc
> etc, how do we know what is being sent.
There's a link in the dialog box, which shows what amounts to a core memory dump and other notes. That's what's being sent... possibly.
> If Windows was on the cheap I think it'd sell more, in fact, most
> Microsoft products are too expensive to buy for the average home
> user, which is why they move to piracy instead.
Microsoft make most of their money from business products anyway, from server software to services. And you'll find an OS is pretty much difficult to make, so the price point for home users is fair I'd say. Not that I'd know, I get all MS stuff for free legally anyways. :)
> It's not a bad operating system to be honest, there is a lot of
> support for it, it's just there is too much stuff hidden away from
> us.
Not really, again you'll find it's application specific, and there's a whole bevy of tutorials and guides on the web on the more hidden parts of XP.
> "Do you want to send this error report to Microsoft" etc
> etc, how do we know what is being sent.
There's a link in the dialog box, which shows what amounts to a core memory dump and other notes. That's what's being sent... possibly.
> If Windows was on the cheap I think it'd sell more, in fact, most
> Microsoft products are too expensive to buy for the average home
> user, which is why they move to piracy instead.
Microsoft make most of their money from business products anyway, from server software to services. And you'll find an OS is pretty much difficult to make, so the price point for home users is fair I'd say. Not that I'd know, I get all MS stuff for free legally anyways. :)
Palladium you mean. And it has nothing much to do with open source.
gamesfreak wrote:
> Garin wrote:
> Either way, doesn't look like much to interest home users anyway.
>
> Hmmm, I thought the filesystem had some sort of connection with
> having a database-based filesystem so files could be searched for and
> stored logically.
>
> Or was that the next Mac filesystem.
>
> I can't remember
>
> Theoretically (apparently) you would of been able to type say
> "letter to george which I wrote yesterday" and it would be
> able to find it instantly etc
It's "was" based on MSSQL, but again, ditched currently for launch. Oddly enough though, looks like Palladian is still in there, the M$ open source killer!;)
> Garin wrote:
> Either way, doesn't look like much to interest home users anyway.
>
> Hmmm, I thought the filesystem had some sort of connection with
> having a database-based filesystem so files could be searched for and
> stored logically.
>
> Or was that the next Mac filesystem.
>
> I can't remember
>
> Theoretically (apparently) you would of been able to type say
> "letter to george which I wrote yesterday" and it would be
> able to find it instantly etc
It's "was" based on MSSQL, but again, ditched currently for launch. Oddly enough though, looks like Palladian is still in there, the M$ open source killer!;)
Page: