I'm waiting for iPad for Workgroups 3.11. You know the ENTERPRISE edition.

So on a platform that (supposedly) is already rife with fragmentation they are going to have completely different versions just for tablets? How does this make any sense? I understand that tablets and smartphones have different uses and thus different needs, but really a completely separate version?

As an aside... What does this mean for smartphone android version numbers? Will it never get to 3.0? Or will it have a different 3.0?

The Archos devices have several limitations that put them at a clear disadvantage compared to the iPod Touch. First of all, they do not have access to the Android Market. Sure there are other, smaller, markets and I'm sure those are great, but most people are going to want to run the same Android "Apps" on a PMP and a Phone. Much like the iOS devices. Archos also chose to go with a resistive screen instead of capacitive screen that makes a fairly big difference in usage. Go to a BestBuy and play with the an Archos, if they have one set up near you, and then an iPod Touch and you should see the difference.

So yes the moniker is warranted because there hasn't been something that can stand up to the iPod Touch and seem even somewhat impressive. Hopefully this will bring some competition to the market.

You are an insightful and informative flamebait who skewed off of the topic!

If you're company was still in the 1990s you'd be using NT 4 or Windows 98... So They are already out of the 90s?

In all seriousness though my university is still exclusively using XP when running Windows (There are some machines with Fedora on them and a few places use iMacs). So obviously you are not alone.

The only problem with that is the AMD motherboards (especially in the price range they chose) come with USB 3 and SATA 6.0 Gb/s now. Want that on the Intel machine? Extra money... That tends to get rid of the whole Intel value thing since most of the time you're not going to be bottlenecked by the CPU and you get more for your money going with the AMD combination.

Actually... Wasn't there a deal shortly after OS X 10.6 came out that Apple had shipped an older version of Flash and that would cause security issues to come back when upgrading? And wouldn't that mean that flash is installed OOTB?

An interesting thing to note is that this was filed for all the way back in 2008. I'm not too sure of the Open Pandora's history, but if their design that would be prior art was not publicly available when the patent was filed would it still be prior art? Apple sure does some evil things, but I almost wonder if they would have even known of the Open Pandora in 2008 (not that it makes this any more right).

Also, not being an expert either maybe someone here can explain, does the product have to actually be shipping for it to be prior art? If not, then wouldn't all basic mp3 player patents be void since the idea itself has been around for decades?

"sudo reboot" works too!

That's simple. Money.

Not only that, but I wonder if the SEC/FCC would start breathing down their backs if Opera got denied. Especially after that whole Google Voice thing...

<quote><p>It occurs to me that all it takes to break up a 'cartel' like this is one or two successful publishers who are not owned or controlled in any way by the existing publishers, and that such independent publishers are willing to really compete with the other labels to sign talent and publish music. The question is, are there any independent labels right now? I remember seeing a chart sometime ago which showed how a lot of 'independent labels' are really owned by the big music publishers, who just use those other labels to either serve niche markets, or create the illusion of having alternatives to dealing with them.</p><p>Anyone know of any labels which really, truly, are independent, with which bands and music lovers might do business?</p></quote>

riaaradar.com might be of some use to you. It will give you if a particular album was released by a label associated with the RIAA. They have a disputes page too which will help for questionable labels.

Other than that, Dischord (started by Ian MacKaye of Minor Threat and Fugazi fame) and Ipecac (started by Mike Patton of Faith No More and Tomahawk fame) both come to mind as "independent". They might have some distribution deal, but other than that I don't know of either having any ownership ties to the "major" labels

I assume he means PHP code on a Mac OS X server running Apache or something. Some second hand distribution of a PHP application or distributed in a user contributed patch.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_1/12_1xm/feature/guide/ftwrlsmc.html http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/wireless/ps2360/prod_installation_guide09186a00800d9d79.html AKA known as the Cisco WT2700 Wireless system. Which was end-of-lifed almost 3.5 years ago, so I wouldn't see why anybody would be putting in one of these systems anymore.

As someone posted in another thread already, everything done in China by the state/Party is perfectly conforming with their constitution. Specifically:

"The exercise by citizens of the People's Republic of China of their freedoms and rights may not infringe upon the interests of the state, of society and of the collective, or upon the lawful freedoms and rights of other citizens."