break the wall or bring the war
意外的一声蝉叫入耳，唤醒了我有关季节的思考。 久未更新Spaces的我，决定上来写点东西。 Something about me and something about my life. 日子的平淡和波澜于现在的我来说，都是一种折磨。 简单和快乐于长大中的我来说，永远都那么遥远。 满足也许就是妥协吧，我想。 我过着平静的生活，然而一切也并非我想的平静。 生活的巨变是缓慢又剧烈的，理想，慢慢自成为我自暴自弃的借口。 不因为我迷失，只因为我的挣扎已经显得份外无力。 流沙中的生命，显得没有力量，显得脆弱，显得无奈，显得绝望，显得悲壮。 那就是我，一个中国大学生的生活。 初夏的蝉叫，并不响亮，却让人遐想万千。 从低沉到明亮，那一种歇斯底里让人感动。 恰如渴望自由的我，仅留下呻吟的力量。 梦中我还在飞，我看到过高山上的林木，大海上的波涛，沙漠上的骆驼，看到过晴朗的云端。 梦醒后我只能趴在键盘上，感受梦的遥不可及。
Because the DNS problem of apple.pro, I have to use GMail E-mail Address again. So if you want to send me something, please send it to leaskh@gmail.com. And my Windows Live ID and GTalk ID have already switched to the new address(leaskh@gmail.com).
This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification THIS IS A WARNING MESSAGE ONLY. YOU DO NOT NEED TO RESEND YOUR MESSAGE. Delivery to the following recipient has been delayed: leaskh@apple.pro Message will be retried for 2 more day(s) Technical details of temporary failure: TEMP_FAILURE: DNS Error: Timeout while contacting DNS servers —– Message header follows —– Received: by 10.82.138.6 with SMTP id l6mr1148425bud.1173774410929; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 01:26:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Forwarded-To: leaskh@apple.pro X-Forwarded-For: leaskh@gmail.com leaskh@apple.pro Delivered-To: leaskh@gmail.com Received: by 10.82.171.8 with SMTP id t8cs56701bue; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 01:26:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.95.1 with SMTP id s1mr2266748wab.1173774408754; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 01:26:48 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from m15-21.126.com (m15-21.126.com [220.181.15.21]) by mx.google.com with SMTP id z15si19152742pod.2007.03.13.01.26.46; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 01:26:48 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of mitwo@126.com designates 220.181.15.21 as permitted sender) Received: from 220.181.15.155(192.168.4.22, 192.168.18.41, 61.144.78.172) ( 220.181.15.155(192.168.4.22, 192.168.18.41, 61.144.78.172) [220.181.15.155(192.168.4.22, 192.168.18.41, 61.144.78.172)] ) by webmail-app21 (Coremail) ; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:26:27 +0800 (CST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: 45F66033.000099.31316@bj126app21.126.com Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:26:27 +0800 (CST) From: mitwo@126.com To: “leaskh” , “leaskh-“ Subject: =?gb2312?Q?Fw:Fw:=BF=CE=B3=CC=B1=ED=B0=A1~?= X-Priority: 3 X-Originating-IP: [220.181.15.155(192.168.4.22, 192.168.18.41, 61.144.78.172)] X-Mailer: 126com Content-Type: Multipart/mixed; boundary=”Boundary-=_zhwbDsZefzfATXWgxoGKwiYBXxOf” —– Message body suppressed —–
Remember days for iQQ 9 the first version of iQQ is released 7 iQQ fails to work since TM change their protocol 2005.9 iQQ updated to QQ protocol 2005. 1 iQQ stop developing. 以上是在iQQ新主页(http://kantsky.ismac.cn/Coding/iQQ.html)上看到的。 不知道为什么，很有感触。 我想用过Mac的人都会知道iQQ的，因为曾经，用QQ是最为一个Switcher最头疼的事情。 iQQ的项目，让很多和我一样的人看到过希望。 虽然现在已经很少用QQ了，GTalk和Live Messenger占据了我生活和工作上的大多数联系方式。 但是每每想起用Mac以来迫不得已疏远的QQ好友，都有一丝伤感悠然其中。 现在的Adium和LumaQQ我想也给不了我当初遇上iQQ时候的兴奋。 但我想更深刻的感触应该是这让我想起自己的Snowman，那一段纯美的回忆。 软件对于做软件的人来说，意味着太多太多的付出，太多太多的难以表达的情怀。
What’s New in this Version The 10.4.9 Update is recommended for PowerPC and Intel-based Mac computers currently running Mac OS X Tiger versions 10.4.0 through 10.4.7 and includes general operating system fixes, as well as specific fixes or compatibility updates for the following applications and technologies: Application launch times RAW camera support Updated ATI and NVIDIA graphics drivers Handling of large or malformed images that could cause crashes Image capture performance Mouse scrolling and keyboard shortcuts Font handling Dashboard stability Playback quality, and bookmarks in DVD Player USB video conferencing cameras for use with iChat Bluetooth devices Browsing AFP servers Apple USB Modem Windows-created digital certificates Open and Print dialogs in applications that use Rosetta on Intel-based Macs Sharing using AFP, SMB/CIFS, NFS and FTP file sharing protocols Login and authentication in a variety of network environments Connecting to Cisco VPN servers using IP/Sec and NAT AirPort including connectivity to EAP-FAST networks Searching iWork ‘06 and Microsoft Office documents using Spotlight Viewing of QuickTime streaming media behind a firewall Audio playback in QuickTime, iTunes, Final Cut Pro, and Soundtrack applications Determining the space required to burn folders Synchronizing contacts, bookmarks, and calendars to .Mac and mobile phones Mounting and unmounting iDisk volumes Time zone and daylight saving for 2006 and 2007 Security updates For explanation of what a SHA1 digest is, please visit this website: http://www.info.apple.com/kbnum/n75510 For detailed information on this Update, please visit this website: http://www.info.apple.com/kbnum/n304822 For detailed information on Security Updates, please visit this website: http://www.info.apple.com/kbnum/n61798 Download PPC Version: http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/macosx1049comboupdateppc.html Download Intel Version: http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/macosx1049comboupdateintel.html
Lyric: 也许我一直害怕有答案 也许爱情仅在风里打转 离开释怀 很短暂又重来 有时候自问自答 我不要困难把我们击散 我责备自己那么不勇敢 遗憾没有到达 拥抱过还是害怕 用力推开你我一人留下 有一束光 那瞬间 是什么痛得刺眼 你的视线是谅解 为什么舍不得熄灭 我逆着光却看见 那是泪光 那力量 我不想再去抵挡 面对希望逆着光 感觉爱存在的地方 一直就在我身旁 我不要困难把我们击散 我责备自己那么不勇敢 遗憾没有到达 拥抱过还是害怕 用力推开你我一人留下 有一束光 那瞬间 是什么痛得刺眼 你的视线是谅解 为什么舍不得熄灭 我逆着光却看见 那是泪光 那力量 我不想再去抵挡 面对希望逆着光 感觉爱存在的地方 一直就在我身旁 我以为无路后退 反复证明这份爱有多不对 背对着你如此漆黑 忍住疲惫 睁开眼打开窗 才发现你就是光芒! 有一束光 那瞬间 是什么痛得刺眼 你的视线是谅解 为什么舍不得熄灭 我逆着光却看见 那是泪光 那力量 我不想再去抵挡 面对希望逆着光 感觉爱存在的地方 一直就在我身旁 光芒 你是光芒 Download Demo Version: http://www.sunyanzicc.net/ccradio/ni-guang.mp3
Mar 8, 2007 1:04:20 PM 姐，节日快乐。 Mar 8, 2007 4:32:01 PM 你谁
Shot with Tero 600 phone.
Steve Jobs February 6, 2007 With the stunning global success of Apple’s iPod music player and iTunes online music store, some have called for Apple to “open” the digital rights management (DRM) system that Apple uses to protect its music against theft, so that music purchased from iTunes can be played on digital devices purchased from other companies, and protected music purchased from other online music stores can play on iPods. Let’s examine the current situation and how we got here, then look at three possible alternatives for the future. To begin, it is useful to remember that all iPods play music that is free of any DRM and encoded in “open” licensable formats such as MP3 and AAC. iPod users can and do acquire their music from many sources, including CDs they own. Music on CDs can be easily imported into the freely-downloadable iTunes jukebox software which runs on both Macs and Windows PCs, and is automatically encoded into the open AAC or MP3 formats without any DRM. This music can be played on iPods or any other music players that play these open formats. The rub comes from the music Apple sells on its online iTunes Store. Since Apple does not own or control any music itself, it must license the rights to distribute music from others, primarily the “big four” music companies: Universal, Sony BMG, Warner and EMI. These four companies control the distribution of over 70% of the world’s music. When Apple approached these companies to license their music to distribute legally over the Internet, they were extremely cautious and required Apple to protect their music from being illegally copied. The solution was to create a DRM system, which envelopes each song purchased from the iTunes store in special and secret software so that it cannot be played on unauthorized devices. Apple was able to negotiate landmark usage rights at the time, which include allowing users to play their DRM protected music on up to 5 computers and on an unlimited number of iPods. Obtaining such rights from the music companies was unprecedented at the time, and even today is unmatched by most other digital music services. However, a key provision of our agreements with the music companies is that if our DRM system is compromised and their music becomes playable on unauthorized devices, we have only a small number of weeks to fix the problem or they can withdraw their entire music catalog from our iTunes store. To prevent illegal copies, DRM systems must allow only authorized devices to play the protected music. If a copy of a DRM protected song is posted on the Internet, it should not be able to play on a downloader’s computer or portable music device. To achieve this, a DRM system employs secrets. There is no theory of protecting content other than keeping secrets. In other words, even if one uses the most sophisticated cryptographic locks to protect the actual music, one must still “hide” the keys which unlock the music on the user’s computer or portable music player. No one has ever implemented a DRM system that does not depend on such secrets for its operation. The problem, of course, is that there are many smart people in the world, some with a lot of time on their hands, who love to discover such secrets and publish a way for everyone to get free (and stolen) music. They are often successful in doing just that, so any company trying to protect content using a DRM must frequently update it with new and harder to discover secrets. It is a cat-and-mouse game. Apple’s DRM system is called FairPlay. While we have had a few breaches in FairPlay, we have been able to successfully repair them through updating the iTunes store software, the iTunes jukebox software and software in the iPods themselves. So far we have met our commitments to the music companies to protect their music, and we have given users the most liberal usage rights available in the industry for legally downloaded music. With this background, let’s now explore three different alternatives for the future. The first alternative is to continue on the current course, with each manufacturer competing freely with their own “top to bottom” proprietary systems for selling, playing and protecting music. It is a very competitive market, with major global companies making large investments to develop new music players and online music stores. Apple, Microsoft and Sony all compete with proprietary systems. Music purchased from Microsoft’s Zune store will only play on Zune players; music purchased from Sony’s Connect store will only play on Sony’s players; and music purchased from Apple’s iTunes store will only play on iPods. This is the current state of affairs in the industry, and customers are being well served with a continuing stream of innovative products and a wide variety of choices. Some have argued that once a consumer purchases a body of music from one of the proprietary music stores, they are forever locked into only using music players from that one company. Or, if they buy a specific player, they are locked into buying music only from that company’s music store. Is this true? Let’s look at the data for iPods and the iTunes store – they are the industry’s most popular products and we have accurate data for them. Through the end of 2006, customers purchased a total of 90 million iPods and 2 billion songs from the iTunes store. On average, that’s 22 songs purchased from the iTunes store for each iPod ever sold. Today’s most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the open formats. Its hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked into the iTunes store to acquire their music. The second alternative is for Apple to license its FairPlay DRM technology to current and future competitors with the goal of achieving interoperability between different company’s players and music stores. On the surface, this seems like a good idea since it might offer customers increased choice now and in the future. And Apple might benefit by charging a small licensing fee for its FairPlay DRM. However, when we look a bit deeper, problems begin to emerge. The most serious problem is that licensing a DRM involves disclosing some of its secrets to many people in many companies, and history tells us that inevitably these secrets will leak. The Internet has made such leaks far more damaging, since a single leak can be spread worldwide in less than a minute. Such leaks can rapidly result in software programs available as free downloads on the Internet which will disable the DRM protection so that formerly protected songs can be played on unauthorized players. An equally serious problem is how to quickly repair the damage caused by such a leak. A successful repair will likely involve enhancing the music store software, the music jukebox software, and the software in the players with new secrets, then transferring this updated software into the tens (or hundreds) of millions of Macs, Windows PCs and players already in use. This must all be done quickly and in a very coordinated way. Such an undertaking is very difficult when just one company controls all of the pieces. It is near impossible if multiple companies control separate pieces of the puzzle, and all of them must quickly act in concert to repair the damage from a leak. Apple has concluded that if it licenses FairPlay to others, it can no longer guarantee to protect the music it licenses from the big four music companies. Perhaps this same conclusion contributed to Microsoft’s recent decision to switch their emphasis from an “open” model of licensing their DRM to others to a “closed” model of offering a proprietary music store, proprietary jukebox software and proprietary players. The third alternative is to abolish DRMs entirely. Imagine a world where every online store sells DRM-free music encoded in open licensable formats. In such a world, any player can play music purchased from any store, and any store can sell music which is playable on all players. This is clearly the best alternative for consumers, and Apple would embrace it in a heartbeat. If the big four music companies would license Apple their music without the requirement that it be protected with a DRM, we would switch to selling only DRM-free music on our iTunes store. Every iPod ever made will play this DRM-free music. Why would the big four music companies agree to let Apple and others distribute their music without using DRM systems to protect it? The simplest answer is because DRMs haven’t worked, and may never work, to halt music piracy. Though the big four music companies require that all their music sold online be protected with DRMs, these same music companies continue to sell billions of CDs a year which contain completely unprotected music. That’s right! No DRM system was ever developed for the CD, so all the music distributed on CDs can be easily uploaded to the Internet, then (illegally) downloaded and played on any computer or player. In 2006, under 2 billion DRM-protected songs were sold worldwide by online stores, while over 20 billion songs were sold completely DRM-free and unprotected on CDs by the music companies themselves. The music companies sell the vast majority of their music DRM-free, and show no signs of changing this behavior, since the overwhelming majority of their revenues depend on selling CDs which must play in CD players that support no DRM system. So if the music companies are selling over 90 percent of their music DRM-free, what benefits do they get from selling the remaining small percentage of their music encumbered with a DRM system? There appear to be none. If anything, the technical expertise and overhead required to create, operate and update a DRM system has limited the number of participants selling DRM protected music. If such requirements were removed, the music industry might experience an influx of new companies willing to invest in innovative new stores and players. This can only be seen as a positive by the music companies. Much of the concern over DRM systems has arisen in European countries. Perhaps those unhappy with the current situation should redirect their energies towards persuading the music companies to sell their music DRM-free. For Europeans, two and a half of the big four music companies are located right in their backyard. The largest, Universal, is 100% owned by Vivendi, a French company. EMI is a British company, and Sony BMG is 50% owned by Bertelsmann, a German company. Convincing them to license their music to Apple and others DRM-free will create a truly interoperable music marketplace. Apple will embrace this wholeheartedly.