World: r3wp

Mmm... some negative criticisms of Skype. It may make your computer 
a supernode, then you will be doing a lot of switching for the network.

An alternative service is wavigo, which I will check out now.

(still didn't see any skype direct from router technology yet.)

huh :)  http://www.wavigo.com/

Perhaps better than Skype because it claims "No supernodes", but 
you still need a computer as it uses a proprietary protocol.

Yeah, and Skype wins since so many people have it.  good or bad.

Maybe "supernoding" improves the final quality also compare to a 
more simple P2P?

That could be the case, and may explain why Skype became so popular 
so quickly.

Anyone else noticing that google seems to be getting worse ?

(with regard to advertising). Or are the advertisers getting too 
strong for google ?

(Wavigo has a mode for connecting to Skype, by the way, so there 
could be a "leak" from Skype's powerful position.)

Graham, yep your link first takes us to actiontec.com, but if you 
read carefully it still requires the use of a PC. :-(

I suspect unless you read it in big bold type (because it would be 
big news when it would happen) it is safe to assume that the feature 
is not there.

None of the D-Link stuff seems to support the Skype codec either.

The thing is Linksys routers run linux.. so it shouldn't be that 
difficult to build in the skype code.

Agreed.  Their little linux router is pretty cool.

What router? The best so far is Mikrotik :-)

You'd reckon someone would already have done that if Skype would 
allow it, don't you think ?

hmm, I just read about allpeers extension for Firefox, which is supposed 
to become a killer app! What will it allow? To share amongst defined 
set of friends, so riaa and mpaa can't find you ... altme anyone? 
It is a pity plug-in is not production ready, or such solution could 
be introduced by rebol app :-)

Powerfull 2D vector animation package was opensourced due to business 
problems - http://www.synfig.com/overview/

interview with the author is here - http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=13241
  . ... maybe Cyphre could use some techniques for draw, but it is 
GPL :-)

Apple keynote begins in 27 minutes... http://www.macrumorslive.com/web

and here we go...

new iMac dual core 2 Ghz intel. about 2-3 times faster than the current 
model

new MacBook Pro to replace the powerbook. 4-5 times faster than the 
current powerbook

So Reichart when are you moving to OSX. Speed is no longer an excuse 
;-)

Funny enough, I will be posting soon two articles: "Why I don't use 
the Mac" and "Why I don't use Linux"  and I was going to open this 
up to everyone to do battle with me on each point.  The idea being 
that all can learn from this and make the move to the machine they 
like best.  For some people they might read one of the articles and 
say "those five things don't matter to me, so I'm going to buy a 
Mac now" 


For others, it will serve as a thermometer of when it is worth going 
to Mac or Linux.

And I would post the article too "Why I don't use MagmaOS" :-), but 
the reasons are obvious :-) I want small rebol os :-)

new PowerBook is stylish ...

just what does Apple think? I hate their quick-time crap ...

they should use Nvidia, not ATI :-)

I find it hard to believe that any new "pc" can be 2-3x faster than 
another.  What metric are they using??

they always twist the logic. They twisted it even in case of defending 
their PPC ...

they gave up on PPC was too fast ....

just marketing hype

IBM proved their designs are good - xbox, PS3 Cell ...

Maybe their OSX runs 2-3x faster on Intel cpus ?

In which case it must have been running on seriously underpowered 
processors before.

but overall, I am all for new technologies. I have to say I was REALLY 
scared of Intel's future. AMD just got better, and Itanium was really 
a fiasco ...

Now Intel is getting into more cores, home media convergence processors, 
etc. ... that is good. Companies should care about efficiency. I 
want my PC to be here instead of my DVD player, with all the codecs, 
but I don't want to HEAR it ... no single spinning cooler allowed 
... that is why I am looking into mini-itx stuff ...

graham, it's most likely OSX and not just raw benchmarks that they 
use to measure speed

and the powerbook was grossly underpowered

Of note, I WANT to NOT be on Windows.  I'm getting closer every day. 
 In fact the spell checker in Qtask means I don't use Word so much, 
but we need to add a scaling input box (I like to see more of what 
I'm writing). We are going to get the spell dictionary into AltME 
eventually.

it's important to consider that Apple aren't trying to compete with 
PC makers. they are competing with their own software department. 
it's easy for them now to create software that'll only run on highend 
macs. It's kind of silly for them to sell iMovie, tout its HDTV editing 
capabilities and only be able to run the application properly on 
high end macs.

pekr, Apple have been waiting to shift to Intel for the past 5 years. 
IBM gave them delivery problems and couldn't deliver mobile CPUs 
and it's been a fight to keep up on all levels. I suspect Steve saw 
the initial switch to PPC as a mistake and that gave them a lot of 
problems.

Pekr, "why I am looking into mini-itx stuff". I have been waiting 
for nano-ITX for the last two years ... and in that time Apple have 
released Mac mini and announced Mac mini for x86.


I've done the sums, even with the wholesale prices I can get on most 
of the PC components (Via board, laptop HDD, RAM, Case plus time/cost 
of assembly), and the current Mac mini still comes out cheaper and 
quieter even with all the Mac software pre-bundled.


If Apple can release the new Intel-based Mac mini at the same or 
better prices, with the same or better specs, then why would anyone 
wait for Via to get their act together when they can buy a cost-effective 
off-the-shelf solution today, even if it means ditching OS X for 
Linux or Windows?!

 even if it means ditching OS X for Linux or Windows?!

  - not understanding here.  You're saying that Mac hardware might 
  be cheaper then building it yourself.  And then you ditch OSX so 
  you can run windows/linux on the Mac ?

Yeah, that does not jive with the Mac Mini like hardware I have seen. 
 Perhaps I'm not clear on something.

Graham, yes. Reichart, the price comparison is:

	Mac mini 1.25GHz with 40GB Combo drive and 512MB RAM: AU$799

Mini-ITX equivalent:

	VIA EPIA-TC10000 (DC-DC onboard): AU$229
	OEM 40GB 2.5” 5400rpm HDD: AU$100
	OEM Slimline CD/DVD combo drive: AU$140
	512MB DDR333 SO-DIMM: AU$81
	Mini-ITX case (difficult to source): ~AU$150
	Cabling: ~AU$10
	Power supply brick: ~AU$15

which comes to AU$725 (wholesale), and excludes:

	Software
	DVI output
	Packaging
	Assembly


Look at other folks who are trying to do the same thing (with an 
emphasis on small and quiet):


 http://www.hushtechnologies.com/(starting at about 750 Euro (AU$1200))

 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/01/evesham_aopen_minipc_win/
 ($499 pounds, so about AU$1,200 for me)


The Mac mini, for this class of device, wins hands down – even if 
you purchase it as a Linux or Windows (when re-released as an Intel 
Mac mini) box. It's smaller, quieter, cheaper, and more compatible 
(USB2, Firewire and DVI out of the box; and includes a DVI-Analog 
converter for PC folks still living in the 80's).


What's also telling is the noticeable increase in the number of folks 
asking me, “does your software run on Mac”, since its introduction 
– but this might also be the iPod halo effect at work. Regardless, 
I see a lot of them around these days and the general consensus is 
that “they're cheap” - and this from the Dell generation who only 
care about price! ;)

In this vein ... from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4600442.stm

Why don't Apple go the whole hog and run Windows XP on their laptops? 
That way their users could run some useful applications