Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Xbox Runs Its First Legal Homebrew App 360

Posted by timothy from the splashscreen-with-penguin dept.
PineGreen writes: "As Michael Steil, the Xbox Linux project leader says:'On the Xbox Linux website, you can download "linuxpreview," an application that runs on modded Xboxes and is completeley legal, because the XDK was not used for development, and it does not contain any Microsoft code.'. See the X-box logo and Tux on the same screen. More information here."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Xbox Runs Its First Legal Homebrew App More

Xbox Runs Its First Legal Homebrew App

Comments Filter:
  • What a colossal waste of time.

    Think how many Linux drivers could have been written for as of yet unsupported hardware for all that effort.
    • What a colossal waste of time.
      It's not if it annoys the beejeesus out of Microsoft...

    • Not At All a Waste of Time (Score:5, Insightful)

      by donnacha ( 161610 ) on Sunday July 07, 2002 @11:24AM (#3836853) Homepage

      What a colossal waste of time.

      Hardly. If widespread modding, driven by a quite likely boom in Divx Movie piracy [slashdot.org], becomes a reality, Xbox Linux could, no doubt much to the horror of "real" Linux folk, become by far the most popular form of consumer/home Linux.

      Sometimes success can arrive in unexpected forms.

    • Re:Hey, Linux running on x86? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Craig Maloney ( 1104 ) on Sunday July 07, 2002 @11:28AM (#3836878) Homepage
      Actually I think several unsupported drivers were coded for this effort... It's called the XBox (in total).

      Why get all pissy with people who are enjoying themselves and are coding something that could potentially useful? I'm sure folks made similar claims when Linus rolled out his first kernel. "Why a new kernel? What a collosal waste of time! Think of all of the effort that could have been put into writing something for (insert favorite OS from 1993)

      That's OK, though. All of us are short sighted in our lives. I used to think the same way about KDE and GNOME. "What collosal wastes of time" I used to think. Fortunately those very talented programmers didn't listen to the naysayers. Now I don't scoff when someone ports Linux to different hardware architectures. Hey, it's their life. Let them have fun with it.

      • As for the hardware, there isn't anything new on the box except for the graphics chip [xboxgamers.com] and in this hack they don't seem to have done much changing of that driver (or OS, for that matter).

        I don't disagree with what you said, but I think that such blind optimism in regards to new hacks must be tempered. There must be some point at which one must be able to differentiate between something good and something that is merely a waste of time. You wouldn't say to someone who has a PhD in Physics that they were doing a good job if they decided they wanted to prove Kepler's laws of planetary motion. It's simply something that's already been done, the amount of insight that the person will contribute to the whole of physics will be minimal. It is at this time that you ought to tell them (assuming you had the authority, which in the Free Software arena means everybody) that their time could be spent doing better things.

        Hey, it's their life, why don't we encourage them do something worthwhile and chastise them when they do something lame?
        • If someone seriously wants to reprove Kepler's laws, who am I to stand in their way? Hey, if they can come up with refinements to the ways those laws work, or heavens forbid disprove them in some unique way, do I have the right to tell them to knock it off? True there are many unsupported devices out there, but you can't make the corollary that time spent on the XBox would be better spent elsewhere. Who's to say the people who worked on the XBox port would have spent their time supporting something like an NVidia card or some obscure Tulip ethernet card? I highly doubt it.

          Instead of chastisting those involved for wasting their time, why not encourage the hacking. Hacking keeps the community alive, and spurs other to "do one better". OK, so now we have Linux on a modified XBox; why not get Linux on an unmodified XBox? How about running Apache? Maybe even get SDL ported over to the XBox? Who knows what the limits are? Something that may appears as stupid now may spur off something incredibly clever down the road. Remember, it took many people tying wings to their backs and bikes before someone figured out how to get those various hacks to work right. Who knows if someone down the road might benefit from this. It might even be you/

    • You right a colossal waste of time. Perhaps if we organized into a huge corporation and had someone with a huge ego running things we could slowly take over market share and then crush all who oppose us. Then we could slowly destroy all innovation and force our corporate viewpoint upon all others. opps yeah it has already been done.

  • $200,000 Award??? (Score:3, Informative)

    by donnacha ( 161610 ) on Sunday July 07, 2002 @11:07AM (#3836789) Homepage


    So, do they win the $200, 000 Award [slashdot.org]?

    • Re:$200,000 Award??? (Score:2, Informative)

      by chrisw15 ( 230370 )
      So, do they win the $200, 000 Award [slashdot.org]?

      No, part of the requirement was that it must run on an UNmodded XBox...
      • "part of the requirement was that it must run on an UNmodded XBox..."

        Yes, but the rewards were segmented into different requirements. I believe only $100,000 was ear-marked towards getting unsigned code to run on an unmodified Xbox. The rest of it covers "easier" things such as kernel and XFree drivers.

  • Needs signing from Microsoft? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by bolind ( 33496 ) on Sunday July 07, 2002 @11:10AM (#3836803) Homepage
    From the page:

    >This is the first legal homebrew application!
    >Of course you will need a modded Xbox.
    >Microsoft, could you please sign this application?

    What does this mean? Does an unmodded Xbox contain a list or some other sort of checking mechanism that only allows certain programs to run on it?

    • Xboxes, like other disc based consoles, check the discs they run to make sure they aren't pirated copies. Otherwide, anyone with a DVD-RW could make a copy from a local Blockbuster (or download an ISO off the net but blockbuster is more convinient). Unfortunately, this means that programs that you make and burn to disc won't run because it won't pass the check.

      Mods remove the copy checking so that you can run backed up or copied discs.

      • Not necessarily (Score:3, Insightful)

        by DABANSHEE ( 154661 )
        There are companies that make cd cloning machines, which do all the copying in hardware, no software exists to decipher the track. IE the reader just records into ram a streaming image of the bips 'n blips which is streamed into the burner at realtime (or virtually realtime) & recorded onto the new CD, well something like that.

        So the copy is exactly the same as the original, Consequently such hardware CD cloners work even if the original CD is formatted in the HFS, BFS or any other file system type. Even CDs that have been partitioned (want of a better word) & have 2 ISO images burnt onto it, or even both ISO & HFS images on it will burn fine. To the machine its just bips 'n blips.

        I've used one of these machines myself. There would be absolutelly no way that a Xbox would be able to tell a original from a cloned CD. As there's no anti-copy protection by-pass measures built in, & as they cant tell the difference between copyrighted & non-copyrighted CDs, owning/making/selling such machines does't break any laws, even if the user does.

        • Re:Not necessarily (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Fjord ( 99230 )
          Hmmm. I'd have to see one of these work. My understanding is that the original discs have something on them that regular discs don't have. In this way original playstation or xbox discs aren't any kind of standard (on purpose), so this machine would have to be tooled specifically to make these discs. It's not a matter of burners not being able to make copies of the data (they can make them perfectly fine, as evedenced by the fact that backups work on a modded console), but that the discs have something special that the console checks for, probably outside of the data range.
          • In the case of PSX discs, they are intentionally burned with errors. Assuming your CD copier doesn't barf on the errors, your CD copying software will probably correct them for you. Then when the PSX boots, it reads the disc, finds no errors, and refuses to run the game.

            It doesn't take a special drive to copy PSX discs -- just software that will do raw copies of CDs [elby.ch], a CD/DVD-ROM drive that can do raw reads, and a CD burner that can do raw writes (which is most of them nowadays). You don't need special media, either, aside from the fact that some PSX models have lasers that "like" the material of some CD-Rs better than others.

            I'm not sure about the X-Box, but it probably has a similar copy-protection scheme. IIRC it also has the requirement that all software be digitally signed by Microsoft to try to stop unlicensed games. (To further discourage unlicensed game-making, legit X-Box DVDs are also burned "backwards" -- that is, instead of going from the inside of the disc to the outside it goes in the opposite direction. I'm not sure how, if at all, this affects copying, since I doubt a raw copy cares what direction it's being done in.)

            • From the site you linked to:
              I have a game console which uses CDs. Can I copy these CDs with CloneCD?


              Sure you can copy them! But the question should be - will they work? And the answer is: No. CloneCD does not disable the boot protection found on console CDs. As we already said, CloneCD does not modify the data it reads or writes in any way.

              However, if you have modified your game console already to accept backup copies, copies created by CloneCD will work. There is even a nice side effect: Almost any *additional* copy protection (apart from the boot protection) will be copied, too. Backup copies created with CloneCD will therefore work better than copies created by a different program. However, CloneCD was designed to make Safety Backups of PC-CDs, not for game console CDs.
              It still appears to me that there is extra protection in addition to the errors you describe, and this is what the mod chips disable. The same is true for DVD based systems AFAIK.
          • It's not a matter of burners not being able to make copies of the data (they can make them perfectly fine, as evedenced by the fact that backups work on a modded console), but that the discs have something special that the console checks for, probably outside of the data range.

            So you just need to make your Commodore-64 disk nibbler scan all the way out to track 40.
        • There are companies that make cd cloning machines, which do all the copying in hardware, no software exists to decipher the track. IE the reader just records into ram a streaming image of the bips 'n blips which is streamed into the burner at realtime (or virtually realtime) & recorded onto the new CD, well something like that.

          This sounds a lot like "disk nibblers" from back in the Commodore-64 days. The circle is complete.
    • Does an unmodded Xbox contain a list or some other sort of checking mechanism that only allows certain programs to run on it?

      Something I haven't seen anybody mention, but something that I've read and only partially understand, is that each disc contains bootable information that is encoded in some special way. Making custom software encoded in the same way might would not be so difficult, but I believe it would make such software a violation of the DMCA, just another crutch Microsoft can fall back on if they have to.

      So, in a way, yes, the XBox DOES contain some such other checking mechanism that only allows certain programs to run.

  • Linux Set Radio: Future (Score:5, Funny)

    by grungebox ( 578982 ) on Sunday July 07, 2002 @11:14AM (#3836812) Homepage
    Think of all the gaming possibilities now available to X-Box developers! 'Shell Scripting Xtreme!' or 'Marvel vs. Capcom vs. Vi vs. emacs!' I hear in the next Halo your standard gun fires tarballs and RPM's.

  • X-box Linux app (Score:3, Funny)

    by inode_buddha ( 576844 ) on Sunday July 07, 2002 @11:14AM (#3836816) Journal
    Hah! I hope these guys just happen to have tickets to the LinuxWorld Expo. That wouls be a great place for a demo....

  • Price comparision (Score:2, Insightful)

    by cyberlotnet ( 182742 )
    733/64MEG RAM 10 Gig Drive XBOX $180 at the cheapest

    Pricewatch Total for a
    Althon 1.2 chip/Motherboard
    128 Megs Ram
    20 Gig HD
    Case
    Cdrom
    Network Card
    $220

    Come on people... Spend $40 more get at get real.. The time/money you save not having to MOD/Play to get linux installed plus the extra power makings using a XboX as a serverfarm just plain stupid
    • Eh, but it's a DVD-ROM drive, and in a set-top box, that makes all the difference in the world.
    • Here's why... because they can...

      People often ask me why I got a linux kit for my ps2... I only tell them that if they have to ask they wouldn't understand.

      Also don't you want to screw Microsoft? In order for Microsoft to make any money (or to break even for that matter) they need to sell something like 30 games per xbox user. (They get about $5 per game) Why? Because they are selling the XBox for less than is costs to make. Now say you can get an XBox and install linux (and not buy any games) and you and your friends all do the same and install linux and have fun with it. Microsoft looses a lot of money because you aren't even buying 1 game for the xbox. Therefore Microsoft looses lots of money on the XBox project and then decide to bow out to Sony and Nintendo. It would finally be a place where Microsoft has failed.

      That is what I would do... just to screw MS.

      However, those screen shots look kindof hokey and I don't actually see linux booting, just one line at the top. Anyone actually get it to work?

      • Re:Price comparision (Score:2, Interesting)

        by cfish ( 61161 )
        One thing though. Microsoft is losing less than 1 billion dollars on XBox so far. But Microsoft have some 47 billion dollars of cash on hand.

        1 billion / 150 = 6,666,666

        That is, if 6 million geeks go out, throw in $200 hard earned cash and purchase one Xbox without buying any games, MS will lose about 1 billion, which really doesn't sting much for Bill Gates. However, the mod chip is likely to do hefty damage because you can bet that 1 out of each 2 Xboxes sold will be modded and it signals that the prospect of profit is dim.

        Now look at Linux and BSD. No one needs to throw in $200 investment to slap Microsoft in the face.

        But then again, a DivX-VCD-mp3CD set top box sounds like a nice idea. When we come up with even more worth idea for Xbox, I hope the hack will be ready.

        Any creative method to screw Microsoft in every possible way is satisfying and I root for those Xbox hackers... on the sideline that is. I hope that I can get an Xbox for $5 next year to put next to the Microsoft Bob CD.

    • Well, just a comparable Geforce 4 costs about that amount of money....
      And belive me, they are doing it for fun, not economy.

  • Legal HomeBrew Application ?? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by AftanGustur ( 7715 ) on Sunday July 07, 2002 @11:59AM (#3836971) Homepage

    What kind of world/reality are we living in, where your own software can be anything else than "legal" ??

    • A brave new one.

    • echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb15CB32EF3AF9C0E5D7272 C3AF4F2snlbxq'|dc

      So what does this do, exactly? (no, I'm not stupid enough to just simply run it)
      • echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb15CB32EF3AF9C0E5D7272 C3AF4F2snlbxq'|dc

        So what does this do, exactly? (no, I'm not stupid enough to just simply run it)

        I am! It prints out an email address on my machine (omitted for the sake of avoiding harvesters).

        Besides, what exactly is it that you're worried about? It's an echo piped to a calculator. About the worst that could happen is it prints something obscene.

    • Re:Legal HomeBrew Application ?? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by jareds ( 100340 ) on Sunday July 07, 2002 @02:05PM (#3837366)

      What kind of world/reality are we living in, where your own software can be anything else than "legal" ??

      One where your own code is linked against someone else's libraries [slashdot.org]. The FSF won't let you distribute programs linked against their libraries unless you comply with their license either.

      • One where your own code is linked against someone else's libraries [slashdot.org]. The FSF won't let you distribute programs linked against their libraries unless you comply with their license either.

        First of all, you are not paying for those "someone else's libraries" so you realy have no claim for a right to use the code.

        Secondly, you could always duplicate the functionality of the libraries in question by writing your own code.

        Now, in the X-Bos case, you buy the machine it's YOURS, and you have absolutely NO means of duplicating the functionality of the XBox (at least no legal means.

        So, please don't compare apples and oranges and claim that since oranges can be sour, it's also ok for apples to be sour.

        • First of all, you are not paying for those "someone else's libraries" so you realy have no claim for a right to use the code.

          I never claimed such a right.

          Secondly, you could always duplicate the functionality of the libraries in question by writing your own code.

          Now, in the X-Bos case, you buy the machine it's YOURS, and you have absolutely NO means of duplicating the functionality of the XBox (at least no legal means.

          Um, what? I wasn't aware of anyone trying to duplicate the functionality of the Xbox. Since they're being sold at a loss, that would be rather pointless.

          What's actually happening is that people, who couldn't legally use code that comes with the Xbox Development Kit because that would violate both copyright law, nevertheless managed to write legal software for the Xbox by writing their own code to duplicate the functionality provided by the XDK. The situation is perfectly analogous.

    • One with more lawyers than any other living organism.

  • Completely legal? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ultraright ( 517021 ) on Sunday July 07, 2002 @12:02PM (#3836983)
    How exactly is running code on a modded XBox completely legal?

    • Private property (Score:3, Interesting)

      by dmaxwell ( 43234 )
      Maybe because once I buy something then it's mine. Period. End of story. We aren't talking about some sort of nebulous "intellectual property". An XBox is a physical good. If I'm not using it to play copied games then not even the DMCA remotely applies. They are getting full access to their own personal property and no one who holds copyrights on the contents of a Linux distro cares either.....as long as the changes to GPL stuff is released anyway.

      Incidentally, this is how to torpedo them in any propaganda wars. No ultra conservative Republican is going to come out against private property. Once the money changes hands, it is the buyers property.
      • However, the modchips themselves are clearly violating the DMCA, as they reverse engineered the XBOX to bypass copyright protection, reading the DMCA that is word for word what it makes illegal.

        Now the question is; is it legal for you to install a modchip, which bypasses copyright protection? I think we have now entered a gray area.

        -Jon

        (note: I completely disagree with the DMCA, it's already got me into far too much trouble [chillingeffects.org]
      • How log until law states you are not actually buying hardware, but somethng like renting it for some purposes?

        I mean, if I buy a DVD and want to play it on Linux (legaly) I can't. Isn't this like a lifetime "renting" of hardware? If I can't access play a DVD I own on Hardware I know, then I don't really own anything.

        How long until until we are restricted from modifing our hardware as we see fit?
      • Obligatory Preface: I am not a lawyer.

        How exactly does the DMCA not apply here? Modders (of all console systems) are bypassing technological measures designed to stop illegally copied software from functioning. That it allows you to run Linux on it is irrelevant in the eyes of the law, as the case against 2600 magazine, which they themselves gave up on, establishes the precedent for. See also the Elcomsoft case, but less so. DECSS has no bearing on the actual copying of DVDs, it gives anyone who puts out a DVD the mechanism to control what their media will play on, and the courts have upheld the DMCA's blanket protection of such mechanisms so far as completely constitutional.

        The things that an Xbox mod circumvents is such a technological mechanism. The actual purpose of those doing the modding is irrelevant, just as it has been in the Elcomsoft and 2600 Magazine cases, they courts ruled that the circumvention, for any reason, is the illegal activity, not the intent.

        Not that I mind that people are doing it, but if you believe that those creating and distributing mod chips for the Xbox are on any kind of solid legal ground, you are fooling yourself. I expect Microsoft has a team of lawyers working hard on creating a case for this, whenever they determine they want to go to trial over it.

    • Re:Completely legal? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by alannon ( 54117 )
      My guess would be, RUNNING the program itself is not legal, since you need to mod your X-Box to do that, and you 'agreed' not to do that when you opened the box (yes, the whole idea of that is under legal dispute right now), but distributing the program itself is completely legal, since it does not use any copyrighted Microsoft code.
      • Yes, but if the only way to run the code you're releasing is to do something illegal, then I think a case could be made that you are inciting a crime, which is in itself criminal. Even speech loses First Amendment protection if its purpose is to cause "imminent lawless action." If you must do something illegal to run software then I really can't see how the software could be considered "legal".

        • Re:Completely legal? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by dattaway ( 3088 ) on Sunday July 07, 2002 @02:53PM (#3837501) Homepage Journal
          Ford released their new line of cars, which gets 200MPG, but can only reach speeds of 80MPH. Technically, there is a way to make Ford's new cars go 160MPH, but their EULA strictly forbids opening the hood for any reason, punishable by 20 years in prison. Doing so could be considered circumventing activity for reprogramming the car. They needed to do this, because their more expensive models feature a software upgrade and brightly colored stickers to make it go faster. You muck around under the hood, you threaten their revenue stream. Many engineers at Ford would starve due to your criminal intentions.

          Well, wouldn't you know it, several teenagers who weren't old enough to drive got underneath the hood of their parents automobile while dad was away at work. You see, one family had the high end model, and the other didn't. The kids were intrigued. One thing led to another, and next thing you know they were caught and led to jail. They wouldn't have been caught if it weren't for that spectacular joyride lighting up the street across the town.

          The same can be said about an xbox near you. It usually takes a kid about two years to learn enough about a computer system to learn its language and make something useful. Usually, these projects are done by the young who have all the free time in the world. And they would consider it a patriotic duty to be caught too. I remember my first computer, a ZX81. It was 13 at the time and it took a few years before I had the ROM dissassembled and controlling the hardware directly. No documentation, no internet. I'm sure the internet and millions of people from countries all over the world can get together and come up with something.

  • Isn't that a contridiction? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by CMiYC ( 6473 ) on Sunday July 07, 2002 @12:06PM (#3836990) Homepage
    " an application that runs on modded Xboxes and is completeley legal"

    I'm pretty sure the EULA for the XBox hardware states that you can not modify it and that you can only run authorized applications (games) on it. That being the case, how is this "completely legal"? It seems to me that in order to be completely legal, the software would have to have the proper license from Microsoft in order to run.

    • Re:Isn't that a contridiction? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by dattaway ( 3088 ) on Sunday July 07, 2002 @12:21PM (#3837028) Homepage Journal
      Simply refuse the EULA and wipe the useless and annoying default xbox software, replace with useful Linux, problem solved. Surely, they didn't make it so easy...

      The only thing I would be worried about is a hardware implimented suicide logic bomb. Let's say Microsoft hid a little calendar watchdog that sends the operating system a special interrupt ever so often, demanding a special answer.

      I'm thinking about this from the hardware designer's point of view, if they were smart enough to do this... If the software refuses to honor this request, the watchdog would update the death counter. Let's say they made this counter 4 bits long to be forgiving. When it counts down to zero without being reset, the security watchdog knows for sure rebel scum have defeated the imperial forces. The watchdog then simply sends out some low level hardware instructions through the IO ports for every programmable chip. The logic bombs have been set.

      To further obfuscate this event, the hardware could have been designed to trigger the event upon the next power up cycle. Once this state is triggered, the xbox enteres a comotose state and is effectively dead. Or is it? Do they have an option for "factory service" to revive these things? Is the bomb reset by placing a certain IO line at an odd voltage level? Or is it permently latched?
    • Last I heard, you were *buying* an XBox, not licensing it...

      • nope - read the box (Score:3, Informative)

        by BlueboyX ( 322884 )
        There is a EULA on the OUTSIDE of the xbox package. It forbids you from running unauthorized code. And they defend this EULA in the courts because it is plainly viewable to users before/as they are buying the unit, rather than being only visable after you open the box.

        Bummer.

    • EULAs are irrelevant.

      If you didn't have to sign something (not counting a check or credit card slip or something like that) before the store would turn the XBox over to you, then you didn't agree to the EULA.

      If you don't want additional rights above and beyond what you would normally have (such as the right to distribute derivative works), then you have no motivation to agree to the EULA.

      EULAs are not compulsory. I can't make you agree to a contract without your consent.

    • Hardware is a product. You bought it. You did not license it. So far, that hasn't been fucked with by Congress.

      If things were as simple as 'licensing' a product only for a specific use, don't you think Beretta, Colt, etc. would only license firearms for target shooting and approved game hunting? If this would provide a defense against a variety of lawsuits, they would have long ago done this.

  • How Can MS Effectively Prosecute This? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Peahippo ( 539266 ) <peahippo @ m a i l . c om> on Sunday July 07, 2002 @12:11PM (#3837005) Homepage
    This places Open Source on their equipment and that just looks bad for Microsoft. I say "looks bad" in the MSian view of closed technology and monopolistic control of same; kind of an ego thing. Paranoia strikes me, but in such cases of legal precision, IANAL who specializes in corporate software defense.

    Is there some way MS can paint the event as an illegality of some sort, just to get some court action? After all, they have the rafts of lawyers, and the geeksters don't, so once again the rare and elusive justice can be mis-served by bankrupting the opponent. How about: placing another OS on the XBox constitutes "intent to violate copyright" since obviously you will be after all those game DVDs. The DMCA allegedly forbids circumventing copy protection, so perhaps all MS has to do is get a judge or jury to believe that these 1337 h4xx0r5 were aiming in that direction.

    Just curious. I never ask myself if I'm being paranoid -- instead, I ask if I'm being paranoid enough.
    • If they try to use DMCA to prevent this, they are likely to lose. Their case isn't nearly as good as MPAA's was against 2600, which was itself, dubious. Microsoft getting a DMCA ruling in their favor on this issue, would require overt and blatant corruption on the part of the judge, in a manner that would make Kaplan look like a saint by comparison.

      What Microsoft needs is new legislation that goes beyond DMCA. This shouldn't be a problem. Of course, this requires overt and blatant corruption on the part of legislators, but legislators have demonstrated they're ok with that, and not nearly as squeamish as judges. Once the new law gets passed, the courts can safely enforce it without having to worry about responsibility.

      • You can't possibly think that the MPAA's case against 2600 was better than any hypothetical case microsoft can have against this. 2600 wasn't even serving DeCSS, they just had links to it. Sorry, but you're wrong.
      • Of course, this requires overt and blatant corruption on the part of legislators, but legislators have demonstrated they're ok with that, and not nearly as squeamish as judges.

        Heh, I know we all enjoying making fun of Canadian's, but I was describing our electoral system to one a while back, she stopped me by practically yelling, "What? They have corporate sponsorship? Bribery is illegal in Canada!" She was entirelly befudled by the whole concept of 'soft-money' "It buys as many ads as the hard money, eh?"

        My phrases from then on all began with, "But.."

  • Waste of time? I think not (Score:3, Funny)

    by Joey7F ( 307495 ) on Sunday July 07, 2002 @01:38PM (#3837277) Homepage Journal
    Some people have jokingly said That it is not a waste of time as long as we are annoying M$.

    It is more than that! As with every product for consumers the way people hear about them is through advertising...pure and simple.

    So every time Microsoft says they don't want linux being run on their hardware, it not only "bugs" M$ but it also gives Linux free publicity. Hell, if I were IBM, Red Hat et al. I would being running linux on anything and everything Microsoft just for the propaganada value alone!

    No such thing as bad press, and this only makes Microsoft seem like a corrupt organization bent on making computing their way or the highway. Let 'em, to paraphrase Leia "The more they tighten their grip the more [operating] systems will slip through their grasp"

    --Joey
  • XBox Linux and app's will help sell more X-Box's and Bill takes another bag of money to the bank. Oh I get it, eliminate Windows by helping Gates diversify.

  • Real games (Score:3, Funny)

    by IamTheRealMike ( 537420 ) on Sunday July 07, 2002 @02:48PM (#3837491)
    Who cares about Halo - what I want to play is XBill on an XBox. Now that would be hilarious, especially if you were to demonstrate one at LinuxWorld :)

Slashdot Top Deals

To the systems programmer, users and applications serve only to provide a test load.

Close