Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:All your attention are belong to us (Score 1) 156

Yeah, whatever, keep arguing semantics as if we wouldn't have another OS mono-culture if it weren't for Android.

I never said that. Whether or not some other system would have come along is impossible to know at this point. I would like to think that someone would have put together a system that didn't suck. Blackberry might have done it. Maybe Microsoft, but I admit that would have been pretty unlikely. Could have been Maemo, if a bunch of the manufacturers were looking for something to use and they didn't have Android available.

I think you and I just have a different standard for what is really considered a monopoly in a computing market. Apple only dominated a small (but rapidly growing) market for a few years at most. Compare that to Microsoft, which had a monopoly (and arguably still does) for nearly 20 years.

Comment Re:All your attention are belong to us (Score 1) 156

One, you said "early 2000s". Assuming you meant the decade and not the century or millennium, you were off by 4-5 years.

My main point was that the "monopoly" was in a very small smartphone market. For the first couple years, most cell phones were not smartphones. By the time smartphones became the norm, Android was reasonably well established.

Comment Re:Newsflash: Lawyer intentionally misrepresents.. (Score 2) 182

Fair use is fair use. It has nothing to do with competing.

This page and this page seem to disagree.

The lawyer is confusing that with trademark law, and probably should be disbarred for being either completely obtuse and ignorant of the law she claims to know, or disbarred for being a majorly disingenuous douchebag and outright lying.

Somebody is confused, but I don't think it's that lawyer.

Comment Re:Get over it (Score 2) 182

So a billion Android devices is fair use, but add in 500k Chromebooks, and oh no, it's a different matter all together?

Oracle's argument is that a billion devices in a market that Oracle isn't in may be fair use, but 500k devices in a market that Oracle is in makes it a different matter. It will be up to a judge and/or jury to decide.

Comment Re: Wrong again (Score 1) 162

I guess if you want to play meaningless semantics games, sure. You can also say that you automatically accept the license when you make the copy, and then you can still go ahead and do things that violate the license. It doesn't matter how you want to state what you did, you would be liable for copyright infringement either way.

Comment Re: Wrong again (Score 1) 162

In a way, though, that's sort of an impossible statement. The reason that you can run the software without accepting the license is because the license explicitly says that you can. So you're accepting the license when you run the program, but most of the license doesn't apply to you. Courts have ruled that copying the program from disk to RAM in order to execute it counts as making a copy as far as copyright law is concerned (not to say that I agree with the ruling, but that's where they stand right now). So when the GPL says you don't have to accept the license in order to run the software, the effective statement is really that none of the other terms of the license apply to you if you are only running the software.

Comment Re: Wrong again (Score 1) 162

No it isn't! One have to accept the license to copy the software but as long as you don't distribute it you don't have to accept anything..

Use* GPL licensed software? Compile GPL licensed source code?

Allowed without accepting the license.

Distribute GPL software? Must accept the license (otherwise one goes against the copyright) and follow the instructions.

I've emphasized the part of your post that is correct, since you're not quite correct in the rest of your post. As soon as you make a copy of the source code, you have accepted the terms of the copyright license, even if you don't distribute anything.

The terms of the GPL allow you to do pretty much whatever you want until you distribute the software, at which point you are required to make the source code available to anyone you give the software to. That's specific to the GPL, though; it is not an aspect of copyrights in general.

Comment Re:Oh great (Score 1) 162

I can do some very approximate math for you.

If you have 42U racks that take up 1 m^2 each (they're about 2x4') and use 4U servers with 36 disk bays (which is the last one I got), you get 360 hard disks per m^2. If you use 8 TB disks, you'd get about 2.8 PB per m^2.

Comment Re:Oh great (Score 1) 162

I think capacity per disk is starting to become a bit of a factor, too. For some people (read: large companies), It might be worth spending double the price per TB of storage if it also means you need half as many servers to hold the disks. The savings in hardware costs, rack space, and electricity will make up for some of the additional cost for the hard drives.

I've made the decision a couple times to buy 8 TB hard drives, even if they weren't the best price per TB, because it allows for the highest possible total storage before we would have to spend more on another chassis.

Slashdot Top Deals

Programming is an unnatural act.