Linux In the Family Room? 91
njcfm writes: "Ok, you've all heard and seen embedded Linux running in all sorts of useful devices; now with the backing of Intel it can run your home network too!" The story is about UPnP [?] for which Intel has released a Linux toolkit.
Re:Sounds like Jini (Score:2)
What would be the advantage of controlling my uWave from my office? Maybe if it had an automatic popcorn loading mechanism, but even that requires that you monitor the bag closely during the end of the popping. Decent quality video/audio streaming, networking and cooking from a $50-150 device? Hmmm...
What ever happened to the idea of... (Score:3)
Okay, forget PnP, UPnP, whatever.. What we need is the ability to have universal drivers. I know it's probably been said a million times already, but untill such a beast arrives we will still be in the dark ages.
My thought of device independant drivers verges on the line of the idea behind Java. Every system has things that are in common with all other systems - something plugs into something else (be it a chipset, add-on card, etc) to make something happen (RNG on P2 mobos, sound card, video card, network card, etc). There would be a platform level loader that provides a common, standard interface to a higher-level driver. This driver would be directly portable across any platform for which there is a written loader.
Currently its like:
OS -> Driver -> Device
The OS talks to the driver and the driver controlls the device. The problem being that the Driver has to be in a language the OS can understand as well as the device.
Here's what I thought (maybe from reading simealr stuff)...
OS -> Loader -> Device
|
Driver
The loader is called by the OS and uses the instructions of the driver to control the device. The loader is essentially an interpreter for the code in the driver, and since the driver is independant of the OS a company can release ONE driver and hit Linux, BeOS, Windows, whatever... yes, providing that the OS provides an interface for this.
Is there something like this in the works? Linux would be a great place to piononeer a "universal device driver"... base it on Java, or make something new...
Bah, whatever
(if there is something like this I would be very interested in reading up on it)
Security vs Fun Toys (Score:3)
A question for everyone... What type of work is being done, or needs to be done for home security when the house is on the internet. Is there a company who's working on this? I would hate to have someone breaking into the house by disabling my security system from half way around the world.
Another question... Does this mean a central computer will control heat, locks, water, power, and ever thing down to childrens toys? I know this would be a good idea, but once again would this be worth the risk? I think not having some of those "features" would be safer for everyone, once again, what does everyone think, or anyone know places with information on these questions?
--Brandon
Cool (Score:1)
Re:UPnP? Hmm... (Score:2)
When a device comes up, it broadcasts "Hey, what IP's are you guys on? I'd like 198.111.21.42 with a hosts entry of 'Jim's Fridge', but I'm flexible! Oh, and by the way, I'm on Ethernet now, but I can use my SiR transciever too! Do I need two IPs?"
The rest of the devices come up, find an unused IP and assign the name "Jim's Fridge" to their hosts file. The SiR capable machines make a note to activate a connection for devices with that discovery information.
Simple stuff. Microsoft can't even screw that up!
Re:Security vs Fun Toys (Score:1)
Re:Sounds like Jini (Score:1)
>>except it's supposed to work with Intel
>> hardware only
No, UPnP is not tied to Intel hardware in any way. See www.upnp.org.
collaboration efforts (Score:1)
Re:Security vs Fun Toys (Score:1)
Jurassic Park, anyone?
--
Old AT&T Comercial (Score:2)
It is important that technology like this be incorporated into the design and building of the house of today (not tomorrow). Did you forget to trun the stove off? Check it and if so, turn it off, from the other side of the world.
Sure, it poses a threat that someone could crack your toaster to burn your bread every morning, but I would rather have open source software, where such a hole would be noticed quickly, than a proprietary/bianary bundle which will release their security patches quarterly.
Re:security issues with UPnP (Score:1)
Refrag
Re:Biggest problem remains... (Score:1)
What percentage of Joe users do you think would be able to install and/or maintain any sort of home network environment with a dozen or more connected devices?
All Joe user needs is a DCHP enabled firewall device. IIRC some of these are in development right now (or may even be available).
Something like this isn't too complicated. One plug for modem/broadband, and one ethernet plug for the inside. It can DHCP out 192.168.x.x addresses and IP Masquerade for the machines/devices inside.
Re:Sounds like Jini (Score:1)
Re:Biggest problem remains... (Score:1)
Refrag
Re:Sounds like Jini (Score:1)
Sun's vision was that all of your devices would have just one digital connection, which would (essentially) be a network connection. It's more or less unimportant what that is, though I suspect it'll be closer to IEEE1394 and further from 100bTx or whatever.
</P>
<P>
As per Sun's idea, devices would then register themselves on the network (in much the same way NetBIOS stuff does, except less lame) and they would then appear: Display devices, for example, so when you wanted to play something on the DVD player, it could appear on <EM>any display device in the house</EM>. If you had a compliant application on your PC, this could not only be your television or something, but also a window on your PC. By the same token, you could display a movie (or AVI, or whatever) played on your PC on your television.
</P>
<P>
With today's market-ready technology, the only two transport mediums you could really use for this are 100bTx ethernet or IEEE1394 (Firewire, i.Link, whatever we're calling it today.) The problem with ethernet is that to get enough bandwidth out of it, you need a switched architecture, whereas 1394 is fast enough today. You're still going to need a multiple master architecture even so, since things like digital video are pretty demanding, and switches for 100bTx are expensive, since you can't daisy-chain devices.
</P>
Re:What about Drivers? (Score:1)
What you're saying sound good, though. If I'm not misunderstanding, all UPnP devices of the same type have the same API. So for example, in the case of printers, I assume this means that these printers would no longer be PCL, ESCP, Postscript, etc. - all printers will use the same UPnP-defined API. If this is case, an operating system specific driver would still be needed for that API, but at least there would only be one API to write to.
If this is the case, though, how would new device features be added without changing the API?
Re:You are a tool and very clueless (Score:1)
How do you explain L0PHTCRACK: Inside a high-technology company, " L0phtCrack [l0pht.com] 2.5 cracked 90% of the passwords in under 48 hours on a Pentium II/300."
I doubt the most experienced MCSE could reverse engineer MS's source code and remove that tiny glaring security flaw (you know, access by any SKR1PT K1DDIE to your machine). Not after the DMCA anyways.
Or the problems with buffer overflows, the Netbios port (hey if you're an mcse, may as well just shut down everything microsoft has implemented, I mean - its your fault its there).
File & Print sharing, non-encrypted network protocols.
You can't blame MCSEs for Microsofts mistakes - after all, they were trained by MS.
Re:Biggest problem remains... (Score:1)
In your case, you probably don't need it, so you cannot do anything with it.
Why do I need this? (Score:2)
All this seems to provide is another way from companies to sell me something I already have.
Is there something here I am missing?
Re:"Three sizes cover everything" (Score:1)
Biggest problem remains... (Score:4)
What percentage of Joe users do you think would be able to install and/or maintain any sort of home network environment with a dozen or more connected devices? Remember: they will probably have all these devices connected to the internet using some sort of TCP/IP protocol as well, so they will have two networks running simultaneously with a number of different devices made by different manufacturers trying to communicate with each other.
haha...HaHa...HAHAHAHAHAHAHA...cough, wheeze...
Sorry...almost hurt myself there. All I know is it was tricky for me to set up a network in my house using four PCs sharing one cable modem. Networking, firewall, cable network connection through a gateway... Now I'm not a systems guy, but I ain't PC illiterate either. Most people can't even figure out how to add some memory to their machines, much less set up a firewall. I can see it now...the kid down the street is laughing his ass off as he turns your microwave on and off at 5 minute intervals and has your refrigerator order four dozen Tombstone pepperoni pizzas!
Protocols and OS network interfaces have a long way to go before more than 1% of US households have the capability to manage any such animal as all these guys are envisioning...
UPnP clarification (Score:1)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is more of a toolkit addition for internet appliances, not network cards. As far as drivers go, that is up to the appliance manufacturer to design it so that "a device would be able to locate, recognize and interact with other UPnP-enabled devices."
As far as people setting up a personal linux box, this will only make future interactions with UPnP enabled devices more simple.
What I don't get is that statement about MS having no plans for Linux support?!?! UPnP is the support, not OS type.
UPnP Switching in 1890 (Score:1)
Re:"Three sizes cover everything" (Score:1)
Re:Sounds like Jini (Score:1)
The difference is this: Jini(1) is proprietary in that it requires all participants to be running on a Java(1) Virtual Machine. Last time I checked, one had to pay a royalty to Sun to use their Jini(1) classes to create a Jini(1) device. I don't know if this has changed.
UPnP on the other hand is based on protocols. Anyone can participate in UPnP just by implementing the required protocols.
Another difference is that Microsoft took a much more pro-active approach to getting the ball rolling by defining various standard device types and service types (which are described with XML). There's a lot of stuff in the works, although I don't recall exactly what my NDA permits me to talk about, so I better not say anything about it.
We were actually working on an implementation of UPnP for Linux when we got word that Intel was going to release an implementation, at which time we shelved it.
(1) Third party marks and brands are the property of their respective holders.
Re:What ever happened to the idea of... (Score:1)
Well, except that this is the sort of innovative idea that usually comes from Apple, because nobody else has the balls to do it, but this particular idea isn't the sort of thing that Apple would do (they don't need it; Darwin has its own driver model that's supposed to make writing drivers really easy and they should work on all platforms that Darwin suports).
IANAC and ISAHANADDC (I Am Not A Coder and I Sure As Hell Am Not A Device Driver Coder).
--
Re:Sounds like Jini (Score:1)
There goes my VC money... (Score:1)
Security isn't too big a deal, you just need to be careful how you go about it. I plan on using a good firewall(is there one???), NAT(Network Address Translation) and DHCP using 10.x.x.x IP addresses (the 10.x.x.x network is unroutable over the Internet). This makes it so that the devices on the network can't directly communicate to the 'net without the NAT server and nothing can speak directly to that device. Plus you only need 1 valid IP address to run the entire network.
Well, off to do more research for my Business Plan... And hope this doesn't scare off VC money.
Ps. Anyone want to float me $5 mill or so for my startup?
Re:What about SLP (Score:1)
UPnP has several IETF drafts [upnp.org], and SLP does not cover the Auto-IP [ietf.org] solved problem.
I do like the fact that SSDP [ietf.org] utilizes XML [ietf.org] to encode the service data, this makes it extremely flexible.
Re:Security vs Fun Toys (Score:1)
Watch the UPnP Forum Summit Live right now (Score:1)
Very interesting stuff.
Honeywell just showed a UPnP HVAC system.
Intel just showed a Broadband Gateway control-able via UPnP, and a UPnP media (MP3) server device.
Lantronix just showed a UPnP Barbeque (seriously!), and motion detector.
And right now, Broadcom is showing a DVD system that sends DVD content over a home network (Hmmm, that will piss of the MPAA!), and is being controlled by a pocket PC. They're trying to show their technology around QOS.
Irony? (Score:1)
Re:Sounds like Jini (Score:1)
One small problem with this is with time zones. My VCR can auto-set its clock via XDS time data that is transmitted on certain channels, and while this has the potential to be a convenient feature, I often find myself having to adjust the clock one hour back. I live in CST and the VCR likes to set itself to EST. No, there isn't a way to tell it what time zone I'm in. Yes, this feature can be disabled, but for some reason it keeps reenabling itself.
Point is, a similar feature in microwaves/other household items can be handy, but can also be a pain.
=================================
Re:UPnP? Hmm... (Score:1)
But, anyway, PnP has worked, and worked well, right out of the box in the past. The machine was called the Apple Macintosh, remember that one? (I should note here that although I've spent a lot of time with macs, I hate the interface. Why should I trashcan diskettes to eject them? Stupid paradigm) Every Apple peripheral I ever hooked up worked right off the bat just fine. Some 3rd party stuff took a little finagling, but nothing comparable to trying to get a non-PnP Sound Blaster to work in a 386.
--Charlie
Re:Sounds like Jini (Score:1)
What about Drivers? (Score:1)
Re:It's a start.... (Score:1)
>subscriptions fees. (For those of you who don't know, OilChange
>monitors your system's drivers and checks the manufacture's websites
>for periodic updates and will automatically download/install new
>drivers).
What the hell for? The Windows "Driver or DLL Of The Week" game doesn't really apply to Linux or the BSD's.
Re:security issues with UPnP (Score:2)
1) Just because a company with a history of some half-baked concepts is implementing it, doesn't mean it will be bad. MSCHAPv2 is "secure enough" to foil most attacks. And their proprietary Kerberos increases the security if Win2k networks greatly, even if it's as interoperable with the original Kerberos as a dead pigeon.
2) I doubt they will do a "member of IP address" thing you mention. Likely it some proprietary network, like a NetBIOS that isn't tunneled (such a beast existed back in the 1980s). The "UPnP" specification probably contains this and other information beyond simple "handshaking."
As for the security issues, this product is targetted at private LANs which speak a probably non-TCP/IP protocol. While I personally would tend towards public key handshaking with blowfish transport encryption (as well as notification of the user of most actions), I tend towards the paranoid side WRT my encryption and privacy
---
Installation is not the problem ... (Score:1)
Maintenance is a problem, however. An intranet which would require more than a couple of intervention per year would be prompty dumped in the waste bin.
But the big problem is that people shall find *useful* and convenient things to do with an home intranet. I mean really useful. Not just 'look ma, here is a snapshot of the roast in the oven'.
Now I can see how a family with two [ or more ] internet-active kids would like an intranet which allows them to share the ISP connection. But most of the other things I ear when talking of inetconnected network appliances do not make much sense to me.
Hum ... (Score:1)
Toaster + Computer interface + Bluetooth + Speaker + Mad programmer = a Talky Toaster !
Now all we need is for somebody to come up with plans for a scutter!
Re:Biggest problem remains... (Score:1)
Refrag
Sounds like Jini (Score:2)
Can anyone comment on the relative merits of the two technologies?
IANAC (I Am Not A Coder) but this just sounds like a rehash of the same concept, except it's supposed to work with Intel hardware only.
--
Linux in the fam room (Score:1)
hmmm... (Score:2)
One question: Will this get around the "where's the device driver?" problem that Linux faces? Or will every uPNP device still need a specifically developed Linux driver? (I suspect that later.)
-- Diana Hsieh
The best part (Score:2)
Hahahhahaha. Enough said.
logical step (Score:1)
Re:Sounds like Jini (Score:5)
As far as I can tell, the difference here is that UPnP is likely to go somewhere. :)
I think that Sun opened their mouth too soon on some of their favorite technology concepts, like having everything in your house speaking java and doing the Jini thing. They should have come up with a large number of prototype devices and a slick UI before ever saying anything; Microwave (This is the easiest, since controlling a microwave basically comes down to bringing ONE circuit high or not), toaster, oven (Preferrably with a camera in it so I can look at my roast), and so on.
Also, jumping on top of linux support is an excellent move. New JDKs have been slow to appear on linux, I can only assume that new implementations of Jini will be as well. Linux has made huge inroads into the embedded and realtime markets, and ignoring its value as the OS for appliances is too big a mistake to be forgiven. I know that Sun has their own OS to worry about, but they can't make Linux go away, and they had better learn to play well with others.
UPnP? Hmm... (Score:2)
A printer must still have its OS-specific drivers. A scanner? same story. Yes, the peripherials will tell you where they are, and that's a plus... But I don't think our problems will end when everything is automatically recognized.
Much to the opposite.
But anyway, users want to be fed in the mouth... Why don't they include a slave techie with each sold system?
Intel doing Open Source???? (Score:1)
Isn't that listed as one of the signs of the Second Coming? If we see Micro$oft releasing a bug-fix only, free upgrade of Windows, run for the hills and pray to whatever gods or device drivers you worship! ;)
-TBHiX-
"Three sizes cover everything" (Score:1)
The irony of this is... (Score:4)
See the announcement here [newsalert.com], and the meeting publicity material on upnp.org [upnp.org].
Re:Biggest problem remains... (Score:1)
--
These are *MY* opinions.
Another important step (Score:4)
With Gnome and KDE you can have a predefined desktop GUI ready to go on installation. Now you'll be able to get your printers and scanners hooked up automatically. All that's left (if this hasn't been done already) is something similar to MS Internet Connection tool that acts as mini dhcp/dns/proxy server to automatically set up the network.
Realistically, if Corel's office2000 proves itself (or some other similar office product) and network set up becomes transparent, Linux should gain a huge jump in use.
Even the peripheral adding will give many home users a much easier time installing the system (I know I had a heck of a time getting my network card working with linux on my first install...)
Yes, it doesn't do much for people who can already network and do manual installs, but for people who are content with things to just work right with no fuss/no muss, this a *good thing*
Re:Another geek toy (Score:2)
UPnP is NOT PnP (Score:4)
UPnP is also not a Microsoft technology, there are many companies that support the UPnP forum, and yes Microsoft is one of the bigger supporters.
Similar to both HAVi and Jini, UPnP is just one of the computing industries attempts at simplifying the network of "connected appliances" that will be filling your homes in the future.
Sony pushes HAVi because they want the CE devices to be king.
Sun pushes Jini because they want to make licensing money.
Microsoft and Intel push UPnP because they want an IP based, computer friendly, device discovery and control protocol that doesn't require the fees Sun is demanding.
Intel is releasing this Linux UPnP SDK because they don't want UPnP to be seen (by the world) as MS only, and they don't want to see Microsoft control the spec, by being the only OS that supports it (when Millennium ships).
Re:hmmm... (Score:2)
However on a machine devoloped only to run one OS, e.g. an appliance would need only one driver and it could be built in, but everything in an appliance is built in anyway.
Devil Ducky
Re:security issues with UPnP (Score:2)
Just put a firewall between your network and the outside, and deny your fridge access!
Of course this means that AMD will come out with a version of your fridge that runs faster and cheaper.
And your Cyrx Toaster will have a tendacy to burn toast since it cooks it with the CPU instead of heating coils.
To me this is interesting, but I agree with some of the questions of practicality. The best I can see is for notification of events.
Would it be nice to have your fridge email you when it beaks down, so you know to empty it before everythign spoils. Or have your stove let you know your food is burning, while you are on your computer?
Re:Intel doing Open Source???? (Score:1)
I'm suprised to hear that. One would think that Intel's affinity for industrial secrecy and occasional propensity to market manipulation would have extended to matters outside their normal bailiwick. At the very least, the historical relationship between Intel, IBM, and M$ sets some sort of precedent. OTOH, it is a historical relationship...
-TBHiX-
Open PNP Protocol (Score:1)
You Pee 'n' Pee (Score:2)
The original post said:
Jeez, that's what I really want. A product called - "You Pee 'N' Pee"
Don't knock it. An earlier version of this technology ("B.E.E.R.") has enjoyed thousands of years of popularity among geeks/early adopters, and the general/neophyte market segments. It's often one of the first protocols a student learns in college.
It has already found widespread integration with home entertainment centers (TV viewing, VCR movies, and music) and was a vital enhancement to live sports presentations even before the advent of widespread televised sports.
BEER is already widespread in the contemporary American kitchen, though underutilized in that setting. (It can take much of the tedium out of elaborate preparation, for examples) Still, would Thankgsgiving be Thanksgiving without Beer? Not in most households!
Beer is widely used for communications, so much so that some people rarely communicate without using it. It may be the most widely used peering method in modern life. I-buy-U (a beer) is one popular application and Eff-U/Eff-Me often relies on it as well.
While efforts to integrate it into automotive settings have been -er- 'disappointing', the active developer base who try every day to make this work considerable exceeds the total Linux user base. Changes to the automotive infrastructure have long been planned to make this a more secure activity.
There are, however, concerns. Integrating child protection features on the USE, PROVIDER, and SERVICE models has raised serious concerns. Tighter access controls have traditionally failed, and if you think NetNanny and CyberParent are worrisome, check out a nanny or parent on Beer.
Re:Linux no place for the _FAMILY_ room (Score:1)
Re:Sounds like Jini (Score:1)
Actually, it would be tres cool to have your TV pop up an icon telling you when your toast or home-bake pizza was done.
Re:UPnP? Hmm... (Score:1)
Let me take a quick inventory of my latest motherboard full of PnP goodness... let's see... LAN card, sound card, video card, SCSI card, video card, six-zillion-button mouse, and even a USB Nikon camera.
Hell, even most monitors are PnP these days.
Bitch about MS or Windows all you want, but at least restrict yourself to facts, or reasonable facsimilies thereof. And you kids wonder why the profit-making world still snickers when somebody says the L-word...
Re:The irony of this is... (Score:1)
Re:Linux no place for the _FAMILY_ room (Score:1)
Intel and Open Source? Believe it. (Score:2)
Intel's been helping with Mozilla for a long while now. For instance, look at all the bugs [mozilla.org] that have been assigned on Bugzilla to people with @intel.com addresses. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Intel also had people working on other open source projects.
They have to be working with the source with this type of box, or as some people have pointed out, the living room box just wouldn't be stable enough. Perhaps we should stop thinking of Intel as a hardware company...their marketing mantra of "building blocks of the internet" includes software too.
-Merlyn42
An idea for linux... (Score:1)
The Woz suggested something similar to this once, his idea was based on including the driver in some rom on the device. A good idea, but limited because then mfg cost goes up to include a memory chip on the device, and if the driver shipped with the unit is buggy, that can be a problem.
With an internet based driver warehouse, you could always get the latest driver. There would need to be a new architecture for this, a standard driver interface, that would be compatable across all kernel versions, and possibly even multiple os's. I think there are a few things in the works like this, but if you're going to do it, do it right and make it robust as possible. This is the open source community, there is no reason we should accept any less.
In this age where net connections are nearly standard, and high speed connections are making there way to the majority, there is no reason we shouldn't make this a reality. And it doesn't have to be LIMITED to downloading drivers over a network, it should also be able to load them the old fassion way from a disk.
just my 2cents.
NightHawk
Tyranny =Gov. choosing how much power to give the People.
Re:What about Drivers? (Score:1)
A UPnP device makes an API available by using the control protocol of UPnP. UPnP control commands are invoked over the network using SOAP. See the UPnP specs at www.upnp.org for details.
Re:Sounds like Jini (Score:1)
Refrag
Re:Sounds like Jini (Score:1)
Re:The irony of this is... (Score:1)
So does Micro$oft control the UPnP spec?
And if so, I am sure that they would be happy to have a Linux implementation of their specification. Which undoubtedly they would "improve" shortly after a Linux implementation was done.
Re:hmmm... (Score:2)
I'm sure it will still require OS-specific drivers. Plug-and-play basically lets the peripheral tell the OS "Ok, I'm here! Now do something with me."
--
Still a need to pray? (Score:1)
----
I've got a TiVo (Score:2)
Intels SDK link (Score:3)
http://www.intel.com/ial/upnp/
security issues with UPnP (Score:3)
"Microsoft is building UPnP into its future Windows releases, starting with its Windows Millennium Edition."
With the future of device connectivity being, "Now you can receive emails from your fridge! And so can the companies that stock it!" -- doesn't this pose a major security risk for 2 reasons.
1) Microsoft is implementing it.
2) Interaction between all devices is handled by a standard protocol and each device is seen as a member of the same IP address?
Does anybody have any ideas for obfuscating or introducing security to these new "connectivity" options?
MCSE'S Bitching (Score:1)
Re:The irony of this is... (Score:1)
But the real question is, did they insist on covering up all the the iMacs?
--
Re:security issues with UPnP (Score:2)
I'd call that a security issue - but then, you don't need to use their implementation. I for one won't.
The protocol specs are out in the open, so they can't hide anything evil in there.
2)Interaction between all devices is handled by a standard protocol and each device is seen as a member of the same IP address?
That's one of the reasons why we need IPv6 at some time - every device could get its own.
Besides, it's always your option not to connect the fridge to the outside world while still having it connected to your local network and selected trusted IPs (control the connections to the outside world with ipchains or something similar)...
How does this fit with existing Linux PnP work? (Score:2)
So uPnP seems to be some sort of extension of regular PnP. Will this new stuff fit with what we already have, or will it require substantial ripup and roadmap pain?
Linux no place for the _FAMILY_ room (Score:1)
Re:UPnP clarification (Score:2)
Maybe, but the SDK allows manufacturers a good tool for creating drivers for their upnp devices. I suspect that with the introduction of tools like this, manufacturers will be better at supporting linux since they don't have to do so much from scratch.
Re:Linux no place for the _FAMILY_ room (Score:1)
What about SLP (Score:5)
SLP (Service Locator Protocol) seems to already be a good way to detect and locate services automatically on a network. It is a defined standard in RFC2608 [isi.edu] and is used as the basis many networking technologies already (NetWare 5, MS W2K) and can be easily and consistantly configured to support any service type imaginable (it uses URI/URLs as its encoding system). There is already two SLP libraries for Linux, one from Sun under the SCSL and one from Caldera under the GPL [openslp.org].
Actually, in my limited research, this looks like a really neat way to generally advertise services. You would be able to create something like the Network Neighborhood or an NDS tree (Using SLP and LDAP together) for UNIX. Being able to plug into a network and instantly find out exactally what hosts have what services available without any configuration on your part (info for master DA server can be sent via DHCP) without all the messiness that the SMB browser protocol has (SMB, against all odds, is actually considered a protocol! Ha!) is a Really Good Feature(tm).
Acro-maniacs (Score:2)
"You Pee 'N' Pee"
Almost as good as drinking a lot of water in a short period of time.
PnP Toaster (Score:2)
No longer is this just a joke, it's a way of life!
damn.. sometimes we just have some weird technology.
nerdfarm.org [nerdfarm.org]
Re:Intel doing Open Source???? (Score:1)
Re:In the Familye Roome (Score:1)
Both really should be possible.
-- fm
It's a start.... (Score:2)
M$ PnP was awfull at first, but it's gotten a lot better if you stick with name brand components. I find a lot of PnP issues envolve the end-user not reading the installation directions first--as it to preload new drivers, etc..
Now all we need is an opensource Linux version of 'OilChange' with no subscriptions fees. (For those of you who don't know, OilChange monitors your system's drivers and checks the manufacture's websites for periodic updates and will automatically download/install new drivers).
Iota
Re:hmmm... (Score:1)
One question: Will this get around the "where's the device driver?" problem that Linux faces? Or will every uPNP device still need a specifically developed Linux driver? (I suspect that later.)
It is in my understanding that there's no longer a need for drivers on your computer. The driver would be embedded in the device.
Think about it, nobody updates drivers for a printer so why couldn't those be embeded in the machine?
Poor Microsoft (Score:1)