I think the only problem I have with Drobo is the horrifying warranty options. For a device that has roughly 80% markup, I think it's attrocious that it has a hardware warranty period (1 year) lower than a cheap USB hard drive from just about anyone else (2-3 years). Especially given that once you're out of warranty, a hardware failure ANYWHERE in that device isn't really recoverable from without going out and buying a new Drobo. You can argue that it's unlikely to fail, but I think that, if they really stand behind the longevity of the device, it should really have a longer manufacturer's warranty.

Whatmore, the extended warranty tops out at 3 years. I think for a device like this, which is essentially luxury storage, it should start at 5 and extend to upwards of 10.

Aside from that, it's a pretty solidly-made device. For ease of use alone I think it's well worth its markup (after all, research and software development isn't free), as it's essentially an intelligent RAID system for the masses that's easy to extend storage on (far easier than ZFS, which I'm using at home). However, they can still go fornicate with themselves for a standard warranty like that. Seriously, I think they're the only hardware manufacturer on the planet with that bad a price/warrany ratio.

Note: If it doesn't have a working market place when you open the box, it's not a tablet. It's a truly half-baked rushed piece of gadgetry.

Viewsonic G-Tablet, Notion Ink Adam, Barnes and Noble Nook. The funny thing about a tablet is that they usually have no:
- Optical Drive
- Memory Card Reader (that's hot-swappable, anyway)
- Easy way to install apps if it doesn't have a built-in Market

We're talking about something that doesn't run Windows or Mac OS, so it has apps/programs/whatever that 99.9% of consumers aren't going to be familiar with. Meaning, if there's no easy way to add functionality, you're dead on arrival. So yeah, currently, the only viable competition is the Xoom and Samsung's tablet.

So with the Xoom, we have a device that's:
- Slower than the iPad (same CPU, MUCH slower GPU)
- Slower than it should be on top of that (everything runs slower in Honeycomb than Gingerbread on identical hardware)
- Heavier than the iPad
- Crappier screen than the iPad (wider, yay, but viewing angles that are an entire generation behind)
- Lower video compatibility (Once again, slower playback than non-Honeycomb Tegra 2 tablets)
- The same price
- Capable of reading MicroSD cards.... someday?

So for the same price, your advantages are an extra chunk of widescreen screen space and a REALLY slow Flash plugin, and just about zero other advantages. While Samsung's tablet is $100 cheaper than Apple's cheapest, it requires a contract, is MONUMENTALLY crappier in specs (lower res, ass viewing angles, worse battery life, slower, not in any way designed around being a tablet).

And keep in mind, the moment you use the word "after it's rooted", you just dropped yourself to less than 5% of the market, and I think I'm being abundantly generous with that statement.

And no, Android tablets' (when they finally exist) main competitor IS the iPad. Apple's selling a million every goddamn month. Please remove head from ass.

Yes, it's perfectly legal to sell GPL software. However, if you're re-branding it as well, you're not allowed to use promotional materials for that software unless stated otherwise. In addition, you can't use art created by anyone with their explicit permission, commercial uses or otherwise. The creator straight-up ripped off Blender Artists and put various pieces of their users' work up.

The "GPL software can be resold by anyone" argument comes up more often than the "Is modding a game system legal" argument whenever these types of articles come up. They seem to always ignore than the issue isn't re-selling the software (or modding a system), it's usually about re-selling content that you don't have the legal right to re-sell (such as including "free" games with that modded system).

Quake 3 is GPL. None of its 3D models, textures, music, or sound are. So while you can re-sell any game you make on the Quake 3 engine, you can't just package Quake 3 for Mac OS X and sell it without repercussion.

Physically holding a cell phone while driving is illegal in Chicago. Using one is not. My car radio has bluetooth functionality and thus, doubles as a really large headset, so I never have to hold onto my phone to make a call.

Ummm, no? 9 watts is low for an Atom chip. 5 watts is unheard of, though AMD is planning on something to that effect with Bobcat.

The dual-core 1ghz Tegra 2 with its embedded graphics core and 720p h.264 video decode (actually 1080p, but 720p support is a LOT more comprehensive) is 2 watts. TWO. And that's from six months ago when Nvidia's design was over power budget. It might be closer to 1 or 1.5 now. That's for the ENTIRE chipset, whereas Atom's motherboard adds another 10-20 watts.

Even the AMD chip, which has the same video decode and level of embedded graphics probably won't hold up all that well in the 5 watt range, and that's 2-3 times the power consumption.

I've seen too many stupid comments about this today and yesterday, so I'm going to clarify a few points:

1. The SOURCE CODE to the EXECUTABLE was released as GPL.
2. GPL DOES, in fact, allow you to sell your build of that executable.
3. While they did distribute the assets (textures, models, sound, etc.) with the source code, those assets WERE NOT distributed via GPL.
4. GPL is for source code, not assets. For that, you're looking at a creative commons type license for something similar.
5. The assets were distributed with a "you can do anything BUT SELL IT" license

Meaning, as they charge $2.00 for it, Lugaru (non HD) is in blatant copyright violation. Never mind, using the name is probably a blatant trademark violation.

I think a lot of games (especially indie type titles) could benefit from going open source, while keeping tight hold on their assets. Sell the textures, models, and sounds, and give the source away. If someone wants to "steal" your game, they're going to have to build the rest themselves from scratch. It would help both in keeping tiny titles like that away from falling into the abandonware pit (especially if it's incompatible with modern OS's), and helping aspiring game devs in understanding how game logic works.

At least the physics model in this world is fair. You'll never have a trap fail on your quarry and then release when you go to test it.

http://www.toshiba.com/ind/product_display.jsp?id1=821
"...after 6,000 or more charge-discharge cycles..."

That's rougly about 16 years. So at least we'll break "short lifespan" soon. Too bad we're still on "quite expensive".

Asus makes one. It's called the O!Play. $90 for wired, $140 for wireless (cheaper in some spots online). Plug a hard drive in or stream over a network.
There's also the Popcorn Hour and all the MivX devices. Soon we'll be getting the Boxee Box for this sorta stuff.

I'm surprised he found a pay download site (I haven't even HEARD of these places) but hasn't found one of the multitude of players that's compatible with his library.

No.

In two words, Hell no.

We don't need another fucking mobile platform, let alone one that Microsoft doesn't even have the balls to make a phone from. Google at least has the Nexus One.

It's a little disingenuous, this example. The pool of employee that becomes A (out of a job) rarely comes back at the level of pay he was at beforehand. Someone with a job in the tech field has a monumentally better chance of finding a better job than someone without one does at finding a job with their old level of pay. It's a momentum-based job market, almost.

BS. The latest version of Windows Media Player that Windows going as far back as XP can run is capable of playing H.264 MP4 files just fine. Hell, if you have a DXVA-capable card (Every Radeon since the 2000 series and every Geforce since the 8000 series, with the sole exceptions of the 2900 and 8800 cards, respectively (8800GS is a go tho)), it'll even play accelerated with next-to-nil CPU usage.

In fact, it's probably more likely to play an H.264 MP4 file than it is a DivX/XviD-encoded Avi file w/o any codecs installed.

Well remember, the OLPC is using a precursor to the PixelQi screen tech, so the display quality is probably surprisingly comparable to e-Ink (in black/white mode).

Wine's biggest problem is that compatibility is currently more important than making it look like it belongs on Linux. At the moment it really feels more like I just opened up a Windows app on Windows 95 running in linux. What makes it so annoying is the following:

Wine will NEVER be fully compatible. Every month a dozen apps (that people actually use) come out (whether a new app or an update to an existing app) that aren't compatible and won't be for a few weeks at best.

Making Wine integrate properly with the desktop environment needs to be done once and has much more value than working with iTunes 9 (which programs like Wine-doors allow 99% of Wine users to work around easily anyway). By making your few legacy Windows apps look like native Linux apps, you make Linux a far stronger alternative to Windows.