Gowator

URPMI is a layer on top of RPM... its not seperate but additive... but the difference is very important for stability and use. An RPM package contains lists of other RPM's that are needed, including versions... When you use URPMI iot has all this information + where the RPM's for the dependencies are and it will automatically find and download the right ones. You can choose to install the RPM's manually using rpm -i <name> BUT it will not find the dependencies whioch is the whole reason for urpmi.... As a n00b I'd strongly advise starting off only using urpmi because if you don't then you must track downt he dependencies yourself, depending on the package it might be 5 or 50... or 500. Almost everything you want will be in the urpmi repository... if its not then the chance is its not a Mandriva RPM... This means your milage may vary.... If you choose say a KDE program then Suse put KDE in a completely different place to Red Hat and Mandriva and so you may have to do a lot of work by hand afterwards... again this is an advanced sorta thing.. not what you want to be messing with until its in your comfort zone... With everything in linux typing man and the name of the command like man rpm will give you detailed if written in 'geekspeech' instructions.... You need to be root to install RPM's for the CLI (because they need to write to system areas) but please consider using urpmi until your more comfy... If its a special package and you can't find it in urpmi then its best to ask here first and get detailed instructions for that one :D

Erm of course its OK, I'm surprised you have to ask ;) I asked because I don't like just dropping out of conversations ;) Call it a courtesy of some sort :D Then I'll accept is as such... Half the tech crap I have I don't need! Me too... and you don't need to answer (:wink:) but for anyone reading I think what Im trying to say is I am as guilty as anyone I know for having cupboards full of tech toys.. but at least they are not ones I'm stilling paying for. i.e. the contract.

Erm of course its OK, I'm surprised you have to ask ;) However Im just going to explain my motivation and you don't need to read it or even answer... (just cos your quoted at the top I won't be discussing any of that or criticising anythng you said so you can skip... My motivation is pretty simple... The iPhone might be a techological marvel... non of us have actually held one so who knows...but its obviously not a item you need... The marketing hype is aimed at making you feel you need this item... (fair enough) but I just wan't to discourage people from convincing themselves of this before the disadvantages become apparent (if they ever do)... In other words don't start convincing yourself now and then rush out and buy it when its available without reading the contract (every last word) .. what it can technically do or what it does for the reviewers given one by Apple is not necassarily what it will do on the basic contract... Its extremely likely other hardware will be made by someone else very soon and that this might be cheaper or more integrated or less restrictive or just plain you prefer it...but a 2yr contract is a long time... so you should look at the price of the iPhone as purchase price + 2 yrs of contract.. and not be fooled by the fact you are paying the contract over 24 months or even that the iPhone will necassarily work as a phone after the 2 years if you don't keep the contract. This link is the first I googled but its worth a read because the guy bought his phone and then a better one came out... but he can't have that phone with Cingular... The point is its not the price of the phone but the price of the contract that limits.. so make sure it does everything you want on the contract you budget for and be prepared for better devices from other companies to be cheaper 2 months after you sign the contract.

OK, sorry i got a bit heated .... We are obviously looking at this from different ends of a telescope... First off I have never had a US cell contract so I can't comment on those but I have had UK ones, Norwegian and French... (Norway is NOT EU) ... All of my experiences have been at best bad... the common theme to all of them is screw the customer. Most of these operators are by nature multinational... or at least own large stocks in other operators... its the nature of the business. From my end of the telescope I can't see any way to seperate the device from the contract for a iPhone because without the contract it can't be used for its intended main purpose which from its name I take to be a phone... (that is I view it as a phone that can do other stuff, not an MP3 player with a phone ...) My supposition is that the whole cell operator business is bad... or at least bad for consumers... the fact that the US has only two real serious operators (when the US is meant to be about free enterprise?) seems to reinforce this not detract from it... even France or the UK with a fraction of the population have several operators each... The fact it is using an existing operator strongly suggests it will follow the pattern of the typical operator ... and if Apple intended differently then they could set up there own network... Apple were a computer company, not a hardware company...until very recently...from their history.and they are also a music retailer (again this wasn't hardware but a service). Virgin were a record company... then an airline... yet when the record stores started selling mobile phone Branson (or company philosophy) looked at the contracts and called bullshit... However this is all company philosophy... Virgin isn't a technology company, if they were they would probably be opensource... but the company philosophy is that you can make money by being straight-up... This is applied to Virgin Air in the same way... such that British Airways actually accused them of giving passengers unrealitic ideas about pricing... Bransons business model is simple... take an area where people are being ripped off by a cartel but have no choice (today a mobile phone is pretty necassary for normal life, like flying ... ) and provide that service...no bull... As an example he paid millions in fines in Ireland for selling condoms... just because he beleived people had a right to buy them without BS. If Apple wanted they could also make money from the mobile network... and provide a no BS deal for their customers.. They would be far from alone in this... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MVNO Here is a Random thread on Cingular... with input from supposed employees... http://forums.mobiledia.com/topic22609.html The problem for me is its not a simple case... Yes people should read the contracts (which is what I'm saying about waiting for the contract on the iPhone) but equally the cell operators set out to make the terms less than clear from a quick skim... People assume they will be able to get out of the contract and don't really read it and the contracts are usually worded so it looks like it will be possible... After many years of skimming contracts I have now decided its pretty stupid of me to have done that. I guess at the back of everyones mind is "there must be some legislation protects the consumer" but what they don't think about is the operators have a team of highly paid lawyers who's sole job is to bypass consumer protection. Secondly my experience in the UK and France is that in many cases the contracts are not valid... the companies rely on the fact it will cost you more to enforce your rights than just keep paying for the contract. The difference of mobile phones to other questionably legal contracts is that the power rests with the operator. They hold custody of part of your identity (your phone #) and your ability to do business and carry out normal life. The only thing that comes close is the product activation on Microsoft.... Their power comes from the fact they can cut you off at anytime and its then up to you to provide proof... A cell phone is practically a "utility" like power or water... but it is not protected by the same legislation. Going back to my original post with the Robertson quote... Its not that the companies are evil, it is that they can't resist screwing those extra bucks outa their clients... Going back to the iPod, the iTunes and copy protection part is key... Apple claim its to stop copying and protect the artists but the fact you can write a CD completely defeats that purpose... as does the fact that if you wish to be illegal there are 101 other ways to crack the protection... All this really achieves is a nominal level of protection that makes it illegal to modify the music to copy it (which is already illegal)... This in my mind just drives people to illegality... for instance making the "fair use copy" harder to produce or dependent on iTunes... just frustrates people... As with the original dvdcss and macromedia protection .... the motivation on this is frustration... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6301301.stm From what I read on the iPhone, inparticular the fact it can't download music directly and that Apple will not be allowing 3rd party add-ons (by which I'm thinking realmedia etc.) they even refuse to have flash... this leads me to beleive that this is in order to protect the music side of the iPhone and control it... Apple have announced they will be making their own flash .... and of course I didn't see it yet but I'm guessing it won't play audio :D My point is that all of this is software controlled....the iPhone is being put together to control what it can do (and here I subsitute restrict or cripple)... the hardware is willing but the software isn't... This points (IMHO) to Apple producing a device that they can restrict its functionality according to contracts... otherwise why start off crippling it in such ways?

I can tell you how it works in Oracle and perhaps that will help by example? As you probably guessed I have zero MS SQL experience... Within Oracle you would define a report... this could be attached as a trigger or just a seperate standalone report defintion. The definition would contain the structure information but not the limits... but it could hold the definition of the limits as a defined variable..this variable (or variables) would be passed from the PSQL to the report.. Its difficult to go further because of the degree of abstraction here (sorry) .. wiothin Oracle the difference in PL/SQL between a function and a procedure is that functions return a value, procedures don't. So I think overall you might need to start looking at this problem in reverse from the definitions and declarations upwards not from the procedure downwards??? Sorry, I realise that's not a great help but its obviously a pretty interlinked procedure

Cool because I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land... You seem to be the only person in the world who has seen this CONTACT... You keep saying what will and will not be possible but its all bullshit until you post a copy of the contract...

its been a while...but ... What database is it? Is it PSQL? usually the stored procedure will itself hold the definition of the data source, if its a report for instance then usually you just pass the limits of that report... like I say, its been a while but i used to program Oracle 6 for a job..

Basically you're picking on Apple because Apple is the topic of this discussion, but you're entire argument/issue is not actually about Apple at all, it's about cell phone carriers - which again, is not the topic of this thread. Apple can/could set up their own network... they could lease bandwidth from one or both carriers and just do it themselves... This is exactly what Virgin did ... both in the UK and France and the selling point of Virgin was not being locked into contracts. OK this might not be possible in the US... (I'm guessing some legislation exists in Europe about this)... but the whole point of the Virgin mobile business is flexibility and non lock-in... Now if Apple were to do the same (and I had the contract to read) then I might be excited... like I say $500 is a reasonable price for a phone..+mp3. and as I have said many times... Apple make great HW and Human interfaces.. Yes, Im picking on Apple because they are the subject of the thread... I'm trying to keep it as much on-topic as possible ;) (really) .. its just I look at mobile phones differently, and the fact is the $500 price tag is completely irrelevant ... until I see the contract and read every work... My experience with mobile operators is that the fine print is the important part. The 6pt grey "some functionality can only be enabled with an additional contract/subscription" parts actually become the most relevant parts of the contracts... Apple have always been a lock-in type company... (fair enough) in my opinion (for what its worth) at least a lot more transparently than Sony... (and a few others) and my perception is that with the iPod/iTunes combination they realised they were sitting on a cash cow but one which could dissapear (quite quickly) because of the legislation under review in a few countires ... As I previously mentioned my experience of ALL mobile operators (Virgin less so) is that they are the ultimate lock-in. Lock-in is core to their business models and these are the people Apple is climbing into bed with. Soulse asked why we are dumping on Apple... ? etc. and I'm explaining my total lack of enthusiasm is because of the cell market itself ... the fact is its a cell phone and seperating it from the contract is in my opinion not productive because without that contract you can't even make a basic call. Until I actually SEE a contract, read it and discect the fine print it remains just another cell phone... It doesn't seem exciting, its finctionality doesn't seem much better than sticking an elastic band around my MP4 player and phone... (even if it looks much prettier) ... The fact you can't download music directly for instance seems lame... because I can already do this on my Palm... I just stick in the Wifi or GPRS card and I can download music directly. (with a suitable GPRS contract or free Wifi which is available everywhere for the prioce of a coffee...) (Im betting Apple sound fidelity is much better but this isn't the point for me)... its the fact it remains a pretty version of my phone, PDA and MP4 player stuck together... So far as I know the contracts are not available yet, nor the pricing... those lucky people testing them are doing so gratis... with everything unlocked BUT I have no seen a statement from Apple like 1/ Capabilites (OK this is hyped and stuff but details... can I dload music direct or not?) 2/ contract price - duration and cost to terminate 3/ capabilities of the phone wthout any contract... Some people might chose to assume this but now me... The thing is that perhaps all the stuff will work without a contract but perhaps not ... and $500 +contract+other incidentals+ is quite a bit of money if you find out later it doesn't do everything without a contract.

Man, that has been my point all along! Again my point.... it all rests on that contract... Lets say another operator comes out with a "better" product ... or equal one but with a contract at half the price... You are still locked into the Cingular contract for 2 years... Its not like at $500 they are providing "financing"... $500 for a phone + mp3 player is still quite expensive... its not extortionate but its not deal of the century ... so for me it all rests on the contract and 2 yrs is a VERY long time in mobile communications... Seriously, who fault was it that my phone never had GPRS (or whatever else).... Which is why I keep saying... or you put it best

Then I would suggest that to be off-topic for this thread. This thread is about the iPhone, and Apple announcing said iPhone, this thread is not about complaints/commentary on how cell phone lock-in sucks. If you want to discuss that, I suggest you start a new thread in the appropriate place. tyme, the whole point of my objections to ever owning an iPhone are soley based on this concept and most importantly the fact that without the lock-in the iPhone is about as much use as a chocolate fireguard. The basis of the iPhone is that everything you can make it do is controlled if you take away the contracts, iTunes etc. then what you have is a very pretty but useless bit of electronics/art. (Im somewhat guessing at pretty but Apple are pretty consistent on this) If I might make an analogy its like discussing a super duper PC card... that is not supported under linux. It might be the coolest thing in the world under XP but it is of no interest to me. because I'm not switching to XP in order to have this card. My whole point is the iPhone is based around these lock-ins... and equally restrictions. Regardless of what it can do with the contract what can it do without one or with a different operator? The price/value of the product is immaterial while in order to make use of these features you have to subscribe to a contract.. and in the case of mobile telecommunictions this is even more important because the cost of technologies ... be it edge or GPRS are constantly falling for NEW subscriptions... lock-in is everything whgen you are offeriing the same service to new users 6 months down the line for half the price... (not the price of the iPhone, the price of the services) When I buy hardware my #1 concern is it is supported under linux.... if its not then I don't consider it, even if its the coolest thing since ice machines were invented. When I buy a phone my only concerns are what is costs me to make a call, send a text and/or use the extra functionality AND how much is costs me to get out of the contract. As phunni said It also guarantees killing competition....because if another operator offer me more services for less $$$ I am not free to avail myself of that contract. After this I look at what is available, battery life etc. BUT my #1 filter for buying a phone is the contract....and how much it costs me to get out. By way of example here's my old phone... http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/phone.php?p=116 except you can only transfer/send certain types of media... the phone can receive them fine, it just doesn't know what to do with them... and transferring ringtones is blocked... so the bluetooth turned out to be a dead duck... Again perhaps this worked but I wasn't going to find out because to activate it was going to cost (on top of the basic contract) the same price as the phone or more ... over a year... So far as Im concerned the phone is totally crap... the GPRS didn't work at all (because I didn't activate it) the ringtomes thing though not a major selling point was probably just software disabled by my service providor because they sell ringtones... and allowing me to make my own or transfer them would eat into their profits... But let me ask you a question.... ? (straight-up) who's fault is this? I really expect you will agree with me that its my fault... I should have checked these things before I signed a contract, not just presume that everything its advertised to do will work wothout me paying more money? This is my basis of my thoughts on the iPhone... until I review the contract including the fine print, get out clauses etc. etc. it doesn't matter what the phone is technically capable and the price of the "phone" to "buy" because the price of the phone is not guaranteeing I can use that functionality without paying more.

Phunni, yes this is how it started out... cell phones cost thousands then hundreds and the marketing was through get it now, pay through the contract... which is to me hire purchase/leasing to buy. However the majority of cell phones now are "sold" to individuals and the phones themsleves no longer cost hundreds or thousands but <100$ to make... The business is now based around trying to sell something for a price people can't afford through contracts which claw the money back... but even this is not enough because they are elevating the prices of the phones and restricting what you can actually BUY outright. When the phone costs $50 to make but is "sold" at $500 that's already one thing but I guess if people want to pay $500 its up to them... however I think its a step further when this is combined with not actually selling the phone and locking into a contract... I'm not saying companies shouldn't be allowed to do this... that is another issue..I'm saying I am not in the least interested in any phone which comes with a contract exclusively... .. Im not against contracts...I have one but I also want to be able to change as and when I want... and NOT loose functionality of the toy... Look at mortgages... They exist fundamentally to allow anyone to buy a house... Back in the 19C very few people owned houses. Even today you can't buy a house anywhere, For instance Downham near my mom is owned by the Duke of Buckley, his serfs (for that is what they are, including his ownership of them) are only allowed to lease land or houses... The farmers lease land, they can't buy ... if their cow wanders off their leased land it belongs to the Duke... I know of several other places the same where you cannot even pass on the house to your children because when you die the house reverts back... anyway.. mortgages allowed the proleteriat to buy...this is commonly viewed as a good thing. However they have completely changed ... 20 yrs ago a house could be bought for a years salary or less. Back then lets say GBP 10,000 so you spread the cost over 5 years and then owned the house. No longer is this the case in most of the UK.... even a small 2 bed house outside the M25 will set you back GBP 300,000 so once again most people in the UK no longer OWN their house because the deeds are kept by the mortgage company... what you can and cannot do to your house needs thier approval and increasing numbers of people are loosing their house... This is somewhat sad... the enabler (mortgages) have pushed up property prices with the collusion of the lenders... (in many cases also the estate agents) ... Now the average disposable income already has 75%+ being paid into a mortgage...further the lenders are encouraging people to extend mortgages and even sign away the house for a cash sum for retirement. Many people live and die, spend 75% of what they earn on a house they never own... When you consider this its no different to the old serf system where you paid your Lord the tythe. The money just goes to differnet people.... If this was a tax people would be outraged yet most people subscibe to the model because they have no real choice. At the same time people are delighted their house is worth double... but very few ever realise that value because they can't sell it without buying somewhere else. Cell phones are not so much different.... least wise what you finally own is valueless ... they just target in the same way which is over extending peoples ability to pay. The phone isn't worth the GBP 200... if you say it costs $50 to make and another $50 for transport/marketing and whatever then GBP 100 is being generous ...for a GBP 250 phone ... but the cell companies are colluding with the service providors to prevent the market being opened. The inital democratisation of the market via subsidising through the contract is no longer valid because cell phones no longer cost $1000 to make ...

OK, I'll agree on details BUT I want top make this perfectly clear.. I don't hate Apple. That is not the problem! I actually tried buying a minimac last year in the sales (the guy in front of me in the queue got the last one), my next laptop will probably be an Apple and I have recommended them to people (often over Linux) and especially with Applecare. As has been pointed out numerous times, this is only in America. And you aren't technologically locked in, you can still switch carriers, but you are practically locked in for 2 years as you have to pay for the service. After those two years you can cancel the service and go where ever you want (as long as they use SIM cards, I guess). We will have to see the announcements but first let me explain cell contracts in Europe... You can buy a phone outright but not any phone... only ones that the retailers are allowed to sell. Just to point out you still don't "own" the phone like you own a car or refrigerator ... it can still contain software specifically disabling features of that phone and its illegal to enable them. These features can be operator specific.. so even though you "own" a non operator locked phone doesn't mean you can use all the features. These features don't need to be technically reliant on the operator... that is it could be as simple as the ring tones being locked and you can only unlock them by paying a subscription to a certain operator. Or backing up your contacts and messages can be locked ... you can pay the operator then its unlocked and you can backup to your PC. Let me compare to a PC... if you bought the PC from a company with an ISP service as well. I'm disatisfied with the ISP service so I change and then my PC is crippled in some way. Perhaps I can't print or save_as is disabled? And the real problem is its illegal to enable it. . From my POV this means you don't own the PC, its being leased to you dependent on paying for the contract. Cell phones get away with this due to their history, nothing else. When the portable original bricks came out they cost thousands and were almost exclusively for business use. Businesses often prefer leasing to fixed assets, its a tax thing. Secondly a phone without a operator is kinda pointless. The whole idea of contracts/leasing grew out of this... Now the basic technology for a phone costs <$50 ... or significantly less since you can buy outright, no contract a $50 phone. However most phones are still only available under contracts... and it is usually the old models which are sold. So a whole market has sprung up based on what is fundamentally a leasing model. You can take a 1yr contract and buy-to-lease but at the end the finctionality of your phone can still be reduced when you switch operator. Now I can go and get the not-quite-latest phone for FREE ... except I don't own it... and I wouldn't expect to for free. You pay the lease (contract) and eventually you own it, usually by which time the phone is getting old and needs replacing but hey... it was FREE. I can see anyone getitng a "free" phone shouldn't be too surprised when it turns out they are locked into a contract that rips them off. On the other hand however most of the very latest phones are contract only and still cost $500 .. and fundamentally these phones are still costing under $100 to make. I can buy a 1GB mp3 player for $50 (or way less in the far east) ... or for $100 one with a decent TFT screen... ($50 in the far east) and these are retail prices... and a phone for less than $50... either way you look at it these things cost peanuts to make... so if I pay $500 (or even $200) I would expect to own it like I own my car, computer or microwave. What I think really sucks is locked phones being sold and the functionality on them being restricted to one operator. This really does lead to a lot of social problems ... people get killed over their latest phone... and its just a phone... but the market for stolen phones is huge because these can then be hacked and sold on a black market... and the reason for the black market being so large is because the phones are "sold" crippled. Somewhat perversely a stolen phone has more fuctionality than the legal ones in many cases... and the market is not simply for "criminal gangs" who want untracable phones but for people who want a phone they can't pay the contract on. (ho hum such is peer pressure) Now the important part The second reason mobile phones are locked into contracts is the same reason a dog licks its balls.... its simply so simple... they do because they can because they have the ultimate control... the ability to disable your phone if they think you are exploiting parts which are not paid for. This is exploited even further, my "owned" phone had a pay-as-you go card... you only get 3 tries at sticking in a 14 digit number .. if you make 3 mistakes your phone is LOCKED... You then must go into a store to get it unlocked and guess what, you have to sit and listen to the marketing drivel and tell the sales person 20+ times you do not want a new phone. They just keep ignoring you, you can't leave until your phone is unlocked ... legally they must unlock it ... legally they can take as long as they like... Before anyone says... sticking in a 14 digit number on a bus or train is not that easy... one mistake, no corrections allowed... and who has never had to correct a 4 digit pin on an ATM... I just want to qualify, this number is not my number, its on a scratch-card and a one off... someone stealing my phone would not be any less likely to tap this number... if the phone is locked its $5 to unlock it illegally in any of 1000 places in Paris. It doesn't protect me at all. What it prevents is people randomly trying 14 digit combinations for randomly finding an unused number that is valid... Come-on 14 digits and only a certain series valid at any one time? 3 strikes and your out is not realistic... even with 100 tries its near infinity ... because only the operator knows which ones have already been used and which have not... and 9^14 is a freakin huge number so even if a million are in circulation at once... Actually 3 tries the chance is P0 (with 1 millon in circ) 1.31x10^-7 vs 4.37x10^-6 ... with 100 million in circulation at any one time its still with 100 tries... 4.37^10-4 ... (this excludes the tries... i.e. the number of available combinations should be decreased by one each try but this is lost in the rounding error anyway. So the ultimate control of the phone is the operator being able to disable your phone whenever they like. Now iPods have suffered from a part of this... but they lack the ultimate control. They are not directly connected to the "network" 24x7 .... Apple have already chased down people making skins... etc. and this is a legal gray area but shows their intent IMHO... Apple were going bust... until the iPod... and now they are raking in money... (OK cool I actualy like Apple whatever people think) but they have just tasted the edge of a market. Whatever the possibilities of an iPod 90% of them are used as Apple intends ... using iTunes and all the other deal. Yes other stuff exists like Iphitus has installed ... and perhaps that 90% is drifting to 85% ... Ok this is gossip but I beleive it http://www.boingboing.net/2004/04/16/apple...s_playfair.html but its not... even when no law exists Now that Apple has tasted from the cup-of-lockins I think its eager to drink more. The iPod seems to be running to the end of this lock-in, in many countires its being challenged and in many way's its a near monopoly position... what is gray is the relationship between iTunes and IPod... Are they the same company :D ??? Are apple using their near monopoly on one to control the other? I don't expect we will agree on this entrely BUT... I think everyone has to admit Apple are approaching this and that if they were a de-facto monopoly this would be illegal in most countires. Last year all the French mobile operators were found guilty of operating a cartel as a monopoly and price fixing. These same operators operate worldwide... and because of the nature of international roaming have shares in other operators ... This is the crowd that Apple are joining.... and at the same time they are gaining the ultimate control they lack in the iPod.. the ability to switch it off permanently.... any time night or day its connected. If they find an illegal tune? or even think it might be illegal (for instance I have some music which I am allowed to have, the artist GAVE ME the right... Apple might just think I don't have the right.... heck it could be the actual artist themselves !!! So far the idea is people are just against Apple.... that's really not my point... I'm against the lock-in concept which seems to be being expanded with the iPhone.

SoulSe, the first thing is I read your O'Reilly link...everything on there say's you can only get apps THROUGH Apple. That is all that matters for me... I don't think Apple need help programming... this isn't why I want an OpenSounrce phone (if I ever got anything more advanced) ... because fundamentaly Apple programming is excellent .. as long as you want to do what Apple want you to do. So for me its simple, it seems you are locked to a single cell operator (Cingular) ... I would never buy a phone locked to any operator because contracts suck... in most cases they are only interested in your 1 shot choice because it comes with the phone you want.. anbd they fully realise when you change operator its probably because of some deal you got with your new phone... In most cases (at the budget end) I can get a new phone and 1 yr contract CHEAPER than a 1yr contract..., certainly less than a new year and a spare battery. I don't know about ZA but in the UK mortgages are like this... they offer special first time buyers rates and then once your locked in the premium and interest rate go up... and as of a month ago ALL UK building societies will charge more for you to renew a mortgage than take out a new one with another company (if you can afford it) Something is just fundamentally wrong with this model..IMHO. One society tried changing and has had to change it back after 1 yr ... this is very sad IMHO because its the consumer paying ... The problem is they couldn't exist on an "honest" policy because other companies were taking away their customers by offering special short term deals... and even offering to pay the fees and give cash bonuses ... Why is it so wrong, because those who are locked into their mortgages are paying the companies take this money from their customers (and frankly in an overpriced market they created) and today the UK is a debt based society. OK noone looses a house because of the iPhone but the cell contracts are still the same deal.. and business model which seems to be suck in the new customers at the expense of the established ones. The second thing about cell phones is the shere amount of money being raked in from cyustom ring tones and the like. I even see adds for porno texto's... "U b8y U U U" comone lighten up and laugh .. isn't that SAD? so the whole issue is not just about Apple, its about the whole deal. Im sure the Apple software will rock BUT I'm also sure it will prevent me using the phone as I wish without paying fees to unlock certain parts... back on land phones every phone line gives out caller ID yet gthe telecoms companies make money by removing this and then charging to not remove it... they charge you to be in the directory and then charge you not to be in it... http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/01/09iphone.html erm OK, not interested (I have a laptop and a Palm)...BUT can it act as a modem? Can I plug my existing devices into it and use it just as a modem? perhaps that might be interesting... Everything Apple have said seems to indicate that anything not Apple approved won't happen and it doesn't seem like this is "approved" ... and I see this and many other "services" being offered as optional... whereby Apple unlock parts of your phone as you progressively pay... Again in my book I'm leasing the phone if I can't exploit everything its technically capable of... Again a bottom line..... Can I install SIP software? This is my #1 interest if I ever thought of a more advanced phone... I don't see that ever happening because Apple are making money from your calls... Until I see hard evidence to the contrary I will think this... Im not going to get all excited and speculative over a lock-in consumer product... until I see it doing what I want...

Pretty much what I was saying.... if I do want anything then its SIP capability to save money but otherwise I want to make calls, receive them and send SMS.. I have a sneaking suspicioin that this is what 80% of the population actually needs and that with the increasing number of idiots who play MP3 phones on the public transport systems already lots of people who thought they wanted one to be cool will be less than happy when playing music from a phone speaker becomes banned. The only other reason to buy something like that is as a toy and then I don't want something so expensive that its also technically illegal to play about with...

Yep if your not using it then it causes more problems than it solves in many cases... its sometihng I try not to mess with myself because I just want to shutdown or not and any fancy stuff inbetween is not interesting but in general the less you need to use it the better in my experience.

This could equally be a problem but I doubt this problem...which is the interaction between the software Powermanagement and your BIOS. The problem is that back a few years when the power management stuff was being designed someone made a mistake... oops ... it was Microsoft ... so non of the power management stuff quite worked right because MS implmented it badly not according to the specification... this then caused the HW manufacturers to have to misimplement the power management in order for it to work with their BIOS .. and history has just got embedded... YOu need the right combination of ACPI in bios and in the software setup... and its a bit trial and error... However, almost certainly if tyou hold the power button for 6 secs it should switch off anyway... I should be in Waddington in the next 2 weeks, I can take a look if you like...

I really don't understand why your getting so heated up ... Its a phone that's all it is. It doesn't allow me to call God direct just other people like every other mobile phone... so what is innovative? On top of this it is packed full of stuff I don't want now what would have been truly innovative would be a simple phone with SMS and 3 weeks battery life and multi cards for different networks... My last Sony Erikson ended up being smashed against a wall in frustration (actually true I got so pissed at it hanging I threw it repeatedly against a wall until it broke into very small parts).. since it needed rebooting frequently (usually when you were on an important call and it just stopped, no indication so it could be in your pocket for hours while you wait for the important call and the phone looks like its working except it can't send/receive calls until you pull the battery out and replace it) and the menu's crawled... It was this phone that drove me to my present Nokia which cost about 1/10th of the price and DOES EVERYTHING the new iPhone does (as far as I would use it) .. if you could tell me how to remove the Camera off my phone and the rest of the useless stuff like MMS and whatever then I would already have the phone I want... Because Apple have said categorically they want complete control.... but you said earlier that is what already here when tyme posted the prototype phone ... But lets just go back to the iPhone..... and why I am less than excited... Apple are a lock-in company pure and simple. I would never ever own an iPod because they are over priced deliberatly crippled and made by Apple.. end of story.... so far as Im concerned Im not buying an MP3 player that has copy protection on it full stop... You can choose to subscribe to iTunes . I never will so the phone is COMPLETELY uninteresting to me, its crippled even if I wanted that functionality which I don't. When I talk about crippled and apple philosophy is Apple restricting the device to prevent it being used for anything they don't think of... let me give an example The original XBOX was a PC with a DVD Rom drive. but unable to play DVD's.. you bought it and then found out since it weasn't advertised that you needed to buy the "remote" for the DVD to work... now in reality the XBOX was just crippled so you had to buy the remote but they unlock it with a physical dongle that also acts as an IR receptor... Now the whole question is if I own the XBOX and I own my DVD's and the XBOX is physically capable of playing them but software crippled why should I have to pay to unlock what is the inate ability of the device? Quite simply do I own it or not.... I would argue if I own a device then there is no way I can do anything illegal by trying to extend the functionailty of that device .. I can see the iPhone is going to be a complete lock-in... Apple will screw extra money out of people simply to activate what is already present... If I can't do as I wish with the device then I don't own it... Apple are selling $50 devices for $500 its great marketing but it doesn't mean the iPod player is any better than a chinese one for $50... or anything special. I don't expect much different from the iPhone...

Much as I agree it would be nice to see Mandriva actually stick at something perhaps the 1yr one was a bad idea but when they change tack before a single cycle is up who can tell....?

He works for SIPphone - which runs on the N80 - he has a vested interest in running down Apple's phone. Yes sure but you have to ask WHY he has a vested interest in SIP phone... Like Mark Shuttleworth he's in the very lucky position of not doing this only for money... You have to compare the likes of Jobs and Gates to Shuttleworth and Robinson and I see a rather big philosophical difference. If you look at Shuttleworth or Robertson they have enough money and seem equally driven but their vision is for an more open world where people chose I don't think Robertson would have been tempted to work for Apple because the whole concept of the Apple controlled phone just stinks to many of us... its against his philosophy and he's rich enough not to have to do things he doesn't like. Well you sum it up... firstly its not open source indeed its designed only to run apple approved software and even then this will be limited... no realmedia or flash... As for trying it I have no intention of ... even if it were given to me Im just not interested but even if I were I see no advantage ... With a bit of glue and rubber bands I can strap my mp3 player, camera and phone together and although it won't be pretty or have the same sleek interface Im sure Apple will excel at it will do the same things WITHOUT lock-in ... Yes but for those of us who don't want our choice in phones restricted we have to hope Apple does botch it up... Its already impossible (or nearly) to buy the phone I want... and taking a pair of pliers, screwdriver and disabling all the stuff I really don't want on my phone voids the warrenty... I can stick a screwdriver through the camera lens or just paint black over it but I can't get rid of the menu that I don't want... and meanwhile I have to pay for functionality that not only do I not want but actively annoy me... drain the battery life etc. Many (probably most people) don't want phones that take photo's or play music ... they are pushed on us because we can't just but a basic phone... if your into geeky phones then I see why its interesting but for me it will jsut restrict my choice of a basic phone even further.

I don't know, but if it continues, posts will have to be modded (split/edited/etc.) as it's getting dangerously close to qualifying as a political debate. And as we all know, that's only allowed in OTW ;) (translation: get back on topic, please) No need and as I said ... so far as I was posting.... and to say SoulSe didn't understand his full quote was EXACTLY what I mean't. Basically that the two things (the OTW part) and Off-Topic but not OTW part... basically exactly as SouleSe said... Anyway... back to my perfect phone... :D the problem being for me summed up in that BBC article by the guy trying to buy a basic phone :D I want battery life... a week would be a good start... (the apple has a solar thingy so that might be its best point) I want a good user interface... To me Nokia simply rocks... I never realised how bad some of the others are till I got a Nokia... but again Apple are pretty good at User Interfaces.. I want the best reception and audio quality... and a lot of Noikia's mine included loose out here because they don't use the clam shell design which basically means the mic. is miles from your actual mouth... IK hate the motorola menu's but their clam designs are excellent ..for putting the mic where it should be... a few Nokias do this BUT they are ruined for me by all the extra features I don't want... What I don't want is a camera, the ability to play music, MMS etc. I know you can ignore the features but I want to go back to Arctic's statement on Gnome... Its really a very good point... because you can make the effort not to be distrcted but that just ends up taking effort. and going through menu's you don't want. One great thing about my phone is the user menu which I can use to have what I use... I just wish I could delete the ones I don't like the camera and associated menu's and MMS etc. because every so often Im using the main menu and I go to my MMS inbox instead of the SMS one. Usually because I'm in a hurry so its more unwelcome... A universal charger is also a pretty big plus as is no proprietry connections... Bluetooth might be useful for a headset or backing up an address book but mainly I'm not interested .. I'd rather have a mini USB connector to be honest.. and the ability to connect this to a bluetooth dongle... (if/when I want) Internet ? Not really .. I'd prefer my palm... same with music .. I just prefer a seperate player... Now I have some suggestions I'm surprised noone does.... interoperability and screens ... I just can't get past fact I have a palm with a nice screen and if bluetooth has a use why can't I stick my gadgets together... My MM player/photo storage device can read CF/SD/etc. and has a tiny screen... it can output to TV and also record directly from video to DivX... and its just a laptop HDD inside... What amazes me is I can't save from it.... and I need a PC to interface it with my palm or phone or ... Let me give a scenario... my palm takes SD... my camera CF .. why can't I use my gadget to read from CF then save to SD ? It would only have been a simple menu needed adding... it just lack the actual menu to do it.. and then when watching a video instead of the 1.5" screen watch it on my palm? The point being that I can see why a device with everything seems attractive... but the reality is I'd rather have seperate but compatible parts... For instance if your watching a movie on your phone you can't check the address book or take a call... without breaking...and unless you have a bluetooth headset you can't check your address book while talking... It doesn't take a lot of imagination to see how embedded linux with a ultra-slim X could be very cool ...so you can browse a item and select which device screen to watch/view/listen to it on. I guess a similar thing is TV's ... I own a TV ... I haven't used the tuner in years... its also got an inbuilt (and redundant DVD) Now what would be cool is a control SW that can be seen on any screen... (in the house) so you just connect the video from device X to the video output for device Y... like I wanna watch this movie on my PC screen/TV/projector... Right now I can do this with about 101 cables and sometimes have to pull cables and connect another ... between different sound systems and stuff this adds endless combinations ... my PC surround is CD on my AMP... and the digital tuner is TAPE 1.... just give me a X like interface and something like eMovix or VDR to control everything from any device... and why not stream the end of the movie to my Palm if Im leaving over the internet?

Yep and quite simply its awesome.... Solarian: You need to read what I wrote about your modem.... You need to check (and online forums are the best place) that your actual modem isn't crippled to prevent more than one user/machine... I expect your information will be in Latvian so its best you search .... If it is then all is not lost BUT you need to consider this before spending money. If its crippled you will need a NAT router or set up YOUR PC to be a nat router and have 2NIC's (or use the ICS but seriously its crap compared to 2 NICs when NICs cost $10 a piece... Do a bit of research on NAT.... and check if you will need it or not... If you do then you can either replace the modem with a router or put a Wifi router which is NAT capable) Hopefully you don't need to worry but check before buying anything...

We are experts at being gentle :D Welcome to the board :D $DISPLAY is what is called an environmental variable... You can set it easily in a bash shell by export DISPLAY = localhost:0.0 export is a short cut, typing man export will explain... DISPLAY is the env var... localhost:0.0 is the "screen" in X... You can have more than one screen independently or you can merge 2 screens.. this is maybe advanced so Ill skip for now.. but :0.0 is the first on the first xserver and :0.1 the second etc. whereas 1:0 is the first on the second xserver... on a PC normally you will never need the second and third xservers... so relax about thatr for now. Back to DISPLAY.... this tells X where to display the window its about to create... say you have 1 xserver and two independent screens ... you have a console on :0.0 if you type xterm then unless DISPLAY is set it won't know where... its left unset by default for security reasons... now if you type export DISPLAY = localhost:0.0 it knows where to display... (localhost is inferred if left out) If you own the desktop (your logged in as you) and just do this a xterm console will start (give it a try) IF you say su to root then typ eit root doesn't own the desktop (despite being root) and it will complain about permissions .. you use xhost (type man again) to give/take permissions... the simplest xhost + will allow anyone from anywhere to open that xterm... you can control the machine and user (see man) Now why does X need this... well you could log into my machine right now (given a name/password and me opening the firewall) and type export DISPLAY = <yourIP>:0.0 then type xterm and WOW... it opens on YOUR screen... if from this console you type another prog then that inherits the DISPLAY do it will also open on your machine... More on su If you type su alone it takes you to the root account... su <username> will open a terminal as that user... if you are root then no password is needed... if not it is... HOWEVER su - or su - <user> does the same but runs the login stuff... for the normal bash shell this is .bashrc etc. (man .bashrc) This means you can set the DISPLAY (or any other variable) and if you use the - switch it will be set automatically .. and you can still not run it by missing out the - See the post above but also the man pages and info pages are a bit techy but in reality everything in linux is straightforwards... you just need to wrap your head round the terms... and demistify them... googleing a command will usually give you lots of info and you can always ask here... no question is considered stupid. Most of the best linux resources are actually FREE.... in most cases commercial books are either copies or just tell you how to use Gimp etc. as you found out.... O Reilly is an excellent series though (although largely most of the stuff is available for free) they compile it well and index it thus making it worth the $$ ....IMHO... rute is excellent :D as are many of the howto's at the LDP... again its a mindshift paradigm... it takes some getting used to to realise the FREE documentation is usually the definitive one!

Did I miss something? :unsure: Heck, I'm South African - but I'm proud of any nation that can come up with something as sweet as the iPhone :P The two don't necassarily have to have any link.. indeed in most cases its better not to IMHO. Back in Aparthied years you could still be proud to be South African without supporting and being embarassed by your government. If this wasn't the case then a black or colored person back then couldn't be proud to be whomever they identify with... :D (enough touching the edges of politics right now though that's for OTW) Actually IBM build quality is excellent in their top range product... styling is something else unfortunately.... So far as IBM they make the best processors for fpu calculations (by speed if not power consumption) and the best most innovative storage... which is why Apple used a lot of their components :D Comparing a IBM and Sun server the IBM's are way better engineered (Sun welding is crap one ones I have worked with) ... Yes so far as laptops the whole package for a MacBook is what makes it .. the build quality and OS integration is the key. Well read the above... As always, it depends what you need a laptop for.... I have one friend who needs a laptop because she uses the kitchen table to work... her reason for needing a laptop is something to be able to remove in one go... her needs are basic WP and Internet so for her a $500 laptop with linux is probably ideal... she doesn't need battery life or power or advanced progs ... A lot of people use laptops for spurious reasons, because they are "cool" or "their friends got one" ... and others use a laptop where a external disk might be more useful ... or even a minimac ... I know one person on a photography forum who wanted a laptop to back up his photo's when on vacation... Whatever way you look at it if this is the sole use of the laptop ... its complete overkill. Its rue, its very difficult to get RAW files backed up onto CD... (90% of places can't do this because they only do jpeg's and jpegs are crap for recording photo's, just take my word or start a thread :D) .. but you can buy external HD based photo storage devices cheaper which are smaller, lighter, take less power and basically if you need them on an extended shoot (like a 3 week bush walk) can be charged from cheap and lightweight solar power chargers ... switched off they hold a charge for weeks and switching on is 1-2 seconds boot ... etc. even the MacBooks can't compete as a simple place to store your photo's... But for a person who needs to do serious work on-the-road then the MacBooks I don't think even have a competitor. edits freakin quotes....

I'm not sure morally wrong is the correct phrase... I (personally think its too strong perhaps) First off remember your a self-confessed geek ... so this applies a lot less to you than granny who bought it for her grandaughter Anyway I was in a shop Im sure Iph knows well (J&B HiFi in Melbourne) the other week (actually buying an iRiver for my GF) and a guy was in with the iPod saying he can't get it to work... he was told by the staff (and this might be incorrect but its what he was told) he had to activate it by using iTunes... Now if this is true then I don't think its reasonable you have to subscribe to iTunes (even if its free) to 'activate' the iPod... this is not exactly common knowedge and one presumes then you have Windows or OS-X... (lets presume most people realise you need a PC) .. but it can presumably be activated/hacked without it .. Amarok says it synchs so... BUT then it would be illegal anywhere except Australia where one presumes its allowed under the new case for the XBOX since its basically the same thing..? Either way ... the "legal gray area" simply means the stated reason for the DRM is BS... obviously if you can rip it then its not preventing you copying it... its making it very slightly more awkward but not really difficult... BUT what it is doing is making it more difficult (and questionably legal) to use it on another player... ... No, the music is tied to having one of four things (the last being in the legal gray area):A working computer with iTunes installed A working cd player (if you choose to burn the music to a CD) A working iPod (if you choose to carry it digitally) Another player (if you choose to burn it to a CD, and then rip it from said CD to mp3/ogg/etc) Without the ability to burn to a CD only iPod owners would be able to use iTunes, and that would be even more of a lock-in (which is apparently how you think it works, when it's not). One could also think of it as one of those things...oh what are they called...oh yes, compromises. You're making a non-existent distinction. I purchased the music file from iTunes, that is now my file. I did not purchase rights to the song, I purchased the right to own a copy of the song. There is no leasing - I have the file for as long as I want it. Yes you have the file but not to do with as you wish... if it was your file you could hack it ... but they are retaining their ability to stop you using it as you wish... so you purchased the rights in a specifically designed format... by parallel if I buy a book and decide to rip off the binding and cut the pages and rebind it half sized (to fit in my pocket say) then I can do that because I own the book....Im not allowed to sell it as my book or copy and distribute it because I only own the rights to own/read the book but physically how a treat (or mistreat it) is up to me... The iPod is the same.... when the battery dies you are free to use it as a paper weight because you own it EXCEPT what you are not free to do is rip off the Os and put on your own (like Iph has done) ... (whereas he now is) ... So my arguament is you don't REALLY own it because it has stuff embedded into it to prevent you using it as you want... and the DMA stops you hacking it to use it as you want... If I buy a car and want to customise it then I can go right ahead.. but if I lease a car I can't ... so in some ways its like this... you are leasing the right to own the iPod but you are not free to use it as you wish... In either respect your rights to own it and do whatever you want are compromised.... The real point to this isn't protecting the artists .. its protecting Apples lock-in... and if this was a non electronic item like a car then it would be clearly judged as an unfair practice... like if Ford sold you a car could only take thier fuel (or Accura sold you one would opnly take their oil) but because of the intangible nature of the DRM software it is somehow viewed differently... Remembere this is a consumer item ... I live in the same world..(I see the same advertisments). I just never owned an iPod but you are telling me lots of new stuff that isn't readily apparent (or understandable) to a non geek. Like I say this isn't necassarily the end of the world... but its also not a consumer oriented position ... and Im sure its catching many people out.... All in all its becoming a more common business practice but being older than you I remember when it wasn't... I somewhat resent having to read the 6pt fine print that seems to come with consumer items now...back on the subject of phones... See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6252991.stm (particularly the comments at the bottom) This is my personal interest in phones... I call, text (SMS) and thats about it... I don't want a camera or mp3 player ... I actually have a camera on mine but its not used... (well some test shots) so when i buy a phone I just want a straight forwards contract ... not pages of fine print... Don't get me wrong I have nothing against geek toys... phones just aren't one that interests me... so if I buy one advertised as playing "my music" I don't want to have to use iTunes... The reason is a phone for me is not an interesting toy but a consumer item and Im just Joe average consumer ...

The music isn't tied to your iPod, it's tied to your iTunes account. If your iPod dies, you should have been smart enough to make a backup, which you can put on your new iPod. If you want to use it elsewhere, burn it to a CD and then rip it from said CD. This is just as legal as ripping a standard CD. That not really what I mean... shouldn't you have the choice to change player to a non Apple player? I realise this isn't what Apple want but and this is my main point about having the cake and eating it... .... Apple should decide are they leasing the music OR selling it... The confusion is largely because they SELL the iPod and lease the music but the music is tied to having a working iPod... Saying you should be smart enough to back it up isn't really 'fair' either... people are buying the iPod as a backup in many ways... and its advertised as this... Of course one day it will fail... but most people are not going to consider this... (it is a consumer device after all) at this point they go back to the store to buy an iPod and find some Chinese made MP4 player for 1/10th of the price ... these things cost very little to make I just got a 4GB one in Vietnam for about US$50 ... Its also expandable with SD cards so I can stick another 4GB in ...anyway ... at this point the person might have $1000 or more invested in iTunes...and then the iPod fails and so thier choice is somewhat limited by this investment... So back to being able to rip the CD .... OK cool but doesn't this defeat the stated purpose of the DRM software? the purpose if after all "to protect the artists rights" which is mainly BS because its protecting the record labels rights not the artist in 90% of cases... because the record labels "own" the artists in a very similar way to plantations used to own slaves... the main difference being that its only their IP they own and they get freed after 5 records (subject to approval by the record label) Anyway for further details see Southpark... ;) they make good arguaments both ways... but basically since thats a strong statement: I Italicised its only their IP because we are in effect saying "anything you think of, write or whatever is owned by us until we say so... which is basically saying IP is something to be bought and sold... but either way.... What Im saying is they should either lease the music or sell it .... because it is a consumer item but one that is being marketed with a lock-in that isn't apparent to most users... they buy the iPod, find they need iTunes and go on from there... thier intention was to buy a "mp3 player" but they end up signing up for iTunes and then this locks them back into the iPod...