Slashdot Mirror

Don't get me wrong. I think Google should fry if they're blocking competing search engines from their browser. But:

Google also owns duck.com and points it directly at Google search, which consistently confuses DuckDuckGo users.

They wouldn't be so easily confused if the DuckDuckGo landing page didn't look nearly identical to Google's landing page. Contrast to Bing, Yahoo, Ask, Startpage, Qwant, Yandex (#1 in Russia), Naver (#1 in South Korea). The only other major search engine which makes the same mistake of copying Google too closely is Baidu (#1 in China).

Because there's just so many ways to visually format a search website.

Google also owns duck.com and points it directly at Google search, which consistently confuses DuckDuckGo users.

They wouldn't be so easily confused if the DuckDuckGo landing page didn't look nearly identical to Google's landing page. Contrast to Bing, Yahoo, Ask, Startpage, Qwant, Yandex (#1 in Russia), Naver (#1 in South Korea). The only other major search engine which makes the same mistake of copying Google too closely is Baidu (#1 in China).

Actually, with a $100 billion dollar price tag, and 122 million federal income tax payers, you've probably paid closer to $819.67. That's a pretty good deal for 17 years of space station.

> No, because the huge tax base that's paid by the minority of the people in the country

Huh? Last I heard, taxpayers were a majority in the U.S.

http://www.ask.com/government-politics/many-u-s-taxpayers-d77a9265390f4bdb

So how long?

Interesting that more companies are moving away form Google. A couple months ago, RealNetworks (ya, reliable I know) changed it's default 2nd party offer from Google / Chrome to Ask. (Fun for the day: use Ask search and search for Ask toolbar ... examine the results).

For me, it is getting harder to use Google search, especially if I want to search for more than two words. For simple searches ... Google works fine. However ... frequently Google will substitute terms (that don't belong), add obvious sales links (that don't apply), or have a referral to a second level search (which has always useless: best example is returning searches for an items from eBay -- if I wanted eBay I would search eBay). Google's image search(method) is much better than Bing's ... but is there a viable option "B" general text / info search?

Interesting that more companies are moving away form Google. A couple months ago, RealNetworks (ya, reliable I know) changed it's default 2nd party offer from Google / Chrome to Ask. (Fun for the day: use Ask search and search for Ask toolbar ... examine the results).

For me, it is getting harder to use Google search, especially if I want to search for more than two words. For simple searches ... Google works fine. However ... frequently Google will substitute terms (that don't belong), add obvious sales links (that don't apply), or have a referral to a second level search (which has always useless: best example is returning searches for an items from eBay -- if I wanted eBay I would search eBay). Google's image search(method) is much better than Bing's ... but is there a viable option "B" general text / info search?

I tried to find out, but the answer seems more elusive than I thought it would be!

Dre never attended college, he tried getting into Northrop Aviation but they wouldn't even take him on as an apprentice because his GPA was so low. Source: http://uk.ask.com/question/wha...

"Dr." is simply a moniker.

Now they'll finally have enough money to hire decent writers!

BattleField 4 (BF4)... (a sore spot)

Origin and Dice had the money, then dropped the ball in so many ways, that many are quitting BF4 or going back to BF3. Between the connection issues, bad color, unbelievable issues on a patch; things that would work prior don't anymore. It's become: christ! what the hell are up going to break this time.

Acquiring the name of BrokenField, even BattleField Friends is taking pot shots at the game. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... you can also read the discontent in the comments to the video.

You can even give them them money in advanced as did thousands of BF3 players did for BF4, and they still release crap. Not many now will allow Origin the luxury of getting much money at all prior to another game release. Many will watch it on Twitch,TV what ever the game and then make up their minds to send Origin money or not.

Money works but you also need good programmers, and to beta test a patch; something Dice seems to bypass in the name of speed to get the patch out, how much time does one need to test it at least once on a computer across the street.

You can see this in a macroculture on Reddit

(BF3 Group) http://www.reddit.com/r/battle... - I'm back to BF3, BF4 sucked/wasn't any fun/too many bugs. BF3 is a much better game.

(BF4 Group) http://www.reddit.com/r/battle... -I'm getting tired of this crap and giving up on BF4, or I quit! it's back to BF3 for me.

So many definitions for macroculture, I'm using this one http://www.ask.com/answers/307...

It would cost a lot more than the Apollo project to get a permanent self-sufficient base on the moon or mars, probably hundreds of times more, maybe thousands, especially is it has to be truly self-sufficient (no external supplies ever, no margin for error). ...

To put costs into perspective:

Cost of Mercury, Gemini and Apollo projects reported as 28.4gigabucks (1.7+1.3+25.4).

The Vietnam war probably cost the US 600gigabucks and the 2003-2010 Iraq War cost the US 3-6terabucks (this figure is more for interest's sake, because I can't be bothered converting it to 1960s equivalent).

And the cost of setting up a lunar/martian base could be spread around the world (assuming racial survival trumps political games).

Muslims believe that during the month of Ramadan people should not even drink water between sunrise and sunset. . So Muslim employers should be able to petition OSHA to allow them to remove water coolers during day time during the month of Ramadan.

Problem for cats is they are better at climbing up than down and can easily get themselves in a predicament, unlike squirrels, they can't actually grip the tree while upside down. I have seen a cat climb up things, or use their claws to hang on things, but, never climb down, they jump down....and if they can't safely jump to a branch that gets them close enough to the ground, I could see them getting stuck.

I say, "I could see" because I have never seen a cat actually get stuck in a tree. They seem to be smart enough to not climb trees very often. A quick google search indicates that this, appears to be a real problem that people have run into but.... its obviously not so common that everyone knows what to do from the panicked "OMG My cat went missing for 2 days and I found him up in a tree, what do I do now" questions out there.

http://www.ask.com/answers/19238201/ja-question?q=&o=0&l=dir&jss=0

and of course:

http://news.msn.com/us/cop-gets-stuck-in-tree-trying-to-rescue-cat-stuck-in-tree

A cat's terminal velocity is survivable for the cat. They can jump from basicly any height and be fine.

Problem for cats is they are better at climbing up than down and can easily get themselves in a predicament, unlike squirrels, they can't actually grip the tree while upside down. I have seen a cat climb up things, or use their claws to hang on things, but, never climb down, they jump down....and if they can't safely jump to a branch that gets them close enough to the ground, I could see them getting stuck.

I say, "I could see" because I have never seen a cat actually get stuck in a tree. They seem to be smart enough to not climb trees very often. A quick google search indicates that this, appears to be a real problem that people have run into but.... its obviously not so common that everyone knows what to do from the panicked "OMG My cat went missing for 2 days and I found him up in a tree, what do I do now" questions out there.

http://www.ask.com/answers/19238201/ja-question?q=&o=0&l=dir&jss=0

and of course:

http://news.msn.com/us/cop-gets-stuck-in-tree-trying-to-rescue-cat-stuck-in-tree

You must be looking at a different Wikipedia than I am.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz

"Federal prosecutors later charged him with two counts of wire fraud and 11 violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act,[16] carrying a cumulative maximum penalty of $1 million in fines, 35 years in prison, asset forfeiture, restitution and supervised release.[17]" Emphasis mine

Let's go one step further:

Source: http://www.ask.com/question/is-wire-fraud-a-felony

"Yes, wire fraud is a felony as it has been considered a federal crime in the United States since 1872. The punishment can be up to 20 years in prison."

I don't really know what else to say. This was on account of the whole JSTOR thing. In case you've been under a rock, here's a freebie: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/03/fixing-the-worst-law-in-technology-aaron-swartz-and-the-computer-fraud-and-abuse-act.html.

Except you typical American Freeway does not have a speed limit of 70 mph, and four tons is heavier than every single non-commercial vehicle in the world.

"Typical" is a loaded word, as so much depends on one's local geographic context. 70 mph is common in Washington state outside of urban areas, for instance.

Four tons might sound like hyperbole; however, some larger SUVs do come close, or even exceed that mark. For example, the Hummer H2 has a curb weight of 6,400-6,600 pounds, depending on engine configuration -- essentially 3.25 tons US. The gross vehicular weight tips the scales at 8,600 pounds, over 4.25 tons. And it sounds like some Hummer models (probably the almost-milspec H1) could be as heavy as 11,000 pounds, or 5.5 tons.

I see a few Hummers daily on my regular commuting route. The posted speed limit never goes above 60, but it's common when traffic is light for folks to be barreling along at 70+ mph.

Cheers,

http://www.ask.com/question/what-is-the-penalty-for-opening-someone-else-mail. 5 Years times, say a billion a day.

Yet in Australia, the most corrupt and inequitable country in the English-speaking world, the courts ruled that the BRCA1 patent owners can screw 'we the people' for all they are worth, all the while their porcine politicians snorted and squealed in delight.

Gene patenting: Australian court rules BRCA1 patent is legal http://theconversation.com/gene-patenting-australian-court-rules-brca1-patent-is-legal-12240

This is nothing new. When asked to rule if Australians had free speech the Australian courts wouldn't even grant them that: http://www.findlaw.com.au/articles/4529/do-we-have-the-right-to-freedom-of-speech-in-austr.aspx http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1741850/QA-What-are-the-limits-to-free-speech http://www.ask.com/question/what-countries-don-t-have-freedom-of-speech

Well, nice to see America putting Australia to shame: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implications_of_US_gene_patent_invalidation_on_Australia

Oddly the UK version still uses the Ask Jeeves branding, though I think it's not actually different.

"Mucus is known to prevent particles such as dust, pollen, bacteria and dirt from reaching the lungs and the trachea. This is because these particles can cause irritation and infections to the lungs. Mucus is usually produced in the nose, where it lubricates the hairs found within the lining of the nose."

http://www.ask.com/question/what-does-mucus-do

Are you familiar with what happens when you multiply very small numbers by very large numbers? A quick google search shows that almost a billion people fly each year. Yes, it's entirely likely that someone--even a group of people--just plain forgot. Haven't you ever had dinner with a dozen people, and not one remembered that there were rolls in the oven until the burning smell hit?

And, as a matter of fact, the more unusual an item is, the more likely I am to forget it. I'm used to patting my pockets to make sure I have my phone, glasses, and wallet, but I rarely travel with a cellphone-controlled robot and I might not remember check for it when moving around.

Your numbers are wrong. There might be a lot of guns, but the number of people with guns is around 60 million ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/people/features/ihavearightto/four_b/casestudy_art29.shtml ) that end up owning multiple guns. From those, I'd imagine half of those (or maybe less) uses it actively every year for something ( as some of you pointed out, it's a self defense thing ). So:

31224 / 60M = 0.0005204 ratio (if everyone used it), but I'd say it is more like 31224/30M = 0.0010408. I'd also like to point out that they aren't used every single day multiple times a day.

In 2008 there were 255,917,664 registered passenger vehicles in the US according to the census. I'm not going to say everyone has exactly 1, but according to this ( http://answers.ask.com/Consumer_Electronics/Other/what_percent_of_americans_own_cars ) almost 90% of americans own a car. Lets assume that only 80% actively use it for something. That brings the total of 204734131 cars that get used every year (hell, I'd say every day, but it'd ruin any statistical comparison). So:

41059/204734131 = 0.000200547 ratio. So that is even less than half the ratio if everyone used a gun every day and almost 5 times less with the adjusted statistics.

And now, about your first point. Where do you think those black market guns come from? I won't say the majority, but some are stolen guns that end up getting sold in the black market. You'll be hard pressed to find a gun (and most likely would get arrested first) in any countries that regulate guns and don't have armed civilians.

About the fallacy, yes, it is. If you want to defend guns you use the argument "10000 robberies were avoided due to guns" not "these other things have bad numbers so it is acceptable to have bad gun numbers". It is not. An argument to be valid has to stand on its own, not hidden behind other social calamities. If death's is a valid point of comparison, do the same argument with people dying of hunger and you'll see how ridiculous it sounds.

And this: "other arguments that point out the fact that an armed populace is critical to a successful democracy". OH MY GOD. Are you this oblivious? Most (I'd say all, but not sure) European democracies regulate guns and, excuse me, are in no way unsuccessful. Where the hell are you getting these ideas from?

Cost of a predator drone: $30M

Cost of a cow: $2K

So, as soon as they use a predator to round up 15,000 cows stolen, they'll break even....

Do you know how many people are employed in authoring, navigating, collecting, and enforcing our complex tax system?

Well, the IRS alone employs over 100,000 people IRS Employees and there are somewhere around 800,000 tax preparers Tax Preparers. So lets say 1,000,000 people are employed "doing taxes". This number is probably really low, considering all of the tax attorneys, consultants, etc. If you factor in tax educators, accountants, investment advisers, etc., you might get 2 or 3 million people employed by "doing taxes". There are around 150,000,000 people working in this country. Workforce So if we instituted a really simple flat tax, we would "unemploy" between 1 and 3% of our workforce. That would send us into an instant recession. So a simple flat tax won't work if instituted immediately. Even if the computer just simplified the code somewhat, it would still reduce employment. That would reduce the income generated by taxes and, as a result, nullify the work of the computer. So, I propose that the tax code be made so complex that it employs 100% of the US workforce. People work all day every day calculating taxes. This is a sure fire way to reduce unemployment!

I honestly have not yet found an e-reader that is comfortable to hold while reading.

Kindle 3 is okayish if you don't grip it hard (sorta let it sit in your palm) - its buttons don't take much force to push, so you barely need to reach them... But it's still far from perfect, and probably not usable as described for people with small hands. I'd definitely prefer bigger buttons, for one thing. And for another, them sitting further down.

The best arrangement that I've seen on a reader so far is Sony PRS-505 (pic). Note that both round buttons down there can be used for page flipping. The trick is that you grip one from below, such that it is between your thumb and the rest of your fingers, leaning it back so that its weight is against the index finger (and indirectly against the other three). Your thumb is then directly over the page flipping buttons - and because there's one on either side on the book, you can hold it in either left or right hand. It is a very convenient arrangement for sitting (e.g. in a bus), because if you put the elbow on your leg to keep the arm steady, it feels like the most natural way to hold the book in the first place.

With Kindle and others, you have to hold it on the side because that's where the page flipping buttons are, and that means that other (unsupported) side works as a lever against your fingers with all its weight.

That would be even worse, then, because the referrer URL contains the search term differently in each search engine -- which would mean that Microsoft would have had to explicitly code it to strip search terms from Google search URLs, rather than simply having the browser watch what people type into *any* search field

Wholly incorrect, and shows you really don't know what you are talking about. Here's a URL from Google search:
www.google.com.au/search?q=swine+flu
And here's one from Bing search:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=foo
They both have the search query in the URL argument "q".
And here's Ask.com:
http://www.ask.com/web?q=foo&search=&qsrc
Still has the search query in the "q" argument, and the word "search" in the URL...
I could keep going if you like, but I think I've embarrassed you enough....

Could Google do the same thing with Analytics? Yes, but they aren't.

Says whom? They're FAQ says they do use the shared information to "improve the services they provide". They have claimed not to use the click-stream data from the Google toolbar, but so far as I am aware they've carefully avoided saying they don't use data from Analytics and all their FAQs and legal materials suggest that they do use that data.

They're accused of screen scraping, but the evidence is coincidental at best. They do a search on a misspelled search term, and note that Bing corrects the search term in the same way as Google. It's also the same correction done by Wikipedia, and Teoma, and Ask.com. So, why doesn't Google mention all of these other sites? Maybe because Bing is actually nibbling at their heels, and the other sites are not?

If my thumbnail calculations are right -- and I make no pretensions about my abilities, so they very likely are not -- that latitude (on earth) would be at 89.8 degrees.

Work:

The rotational period of the earth is 24 hours, which is about 15 degrees per hour (360 degrees / 24 hours).

An average person can walk about 3 miles per hour

That means an average person can walk about 72 miles in a day (assuming non-stop, which we all know won't happen long term, but I ignored that). Therefore the circumference of a circle that a person can walk non-stop in a day is 72 miles, and therefore the circumference of the earth at the latitude where a person walking would match the speed of the sunrise would be 72 miles.

The diameter of a circle with a circumference of 72 miles would be 22.9 miles, and so the radius of such a circle would be approximately 11.5 miles (C=2 x pi x r, so r ~11.5 miles).

Given a plane that intersects the earth such that the circle transcribed upon that plane has a circumference of 72 miles, let y1 be the distance from the center of the earth to center of the circle transcribed upon the plane, and let x1 be the radius of that circle (i.e., 11.5 miles).

If x^2 + y^2 = 4000^2 (the equation for a circle, and r = the radius of the earth, or 4,000 miles), then let x1^2 + y1^2 = 11.5^2 be the circle transcribed upon the plane described in the last sentence. In this case, when y1=0, x1^2 = r1^2, so x1=11.5. From this, you can draw a triangle with the apex at the center of the earth, with the x axis being 11.5 miles, the y axis being the distance from the center of the circle x1^2 + y1^2 = 11.5^2 to the center of the earth and the hypotenuse being the radius of the earth, or 4000 miles. Therefore, the arc sine of (11.5 miles / 4000 miles) is equal to the latitude we are looking for. I think :)

I'm not him, but I'll be happy to oblige. How about this? And I quote "In Iraq's most difficult times, thousands of children resorted in mine cleaning actions. They would pass through mine fields and die, activating the placed explosive devices. In that way, they cleared the path for Iranian armed forces. Before every mission, one Taiwan key was hanged on every child's neck, to open the door of Heaven."

I'm sorry, but anybody that sticks little plastic keys on a kid's neck, tells them it's the key to enter heaven, and then punts their little butts into a minefield? Sick bastards that I wouldn't trust with a pointed stick, much less the power of the bomb.

Do you think an architec is an artist?

Sometimes.

http://www.buffaloscenicprints.com/albums/Downtown%20Buffalo/slides/IMG_0202.jpg

http://rpmedia.ask.com/ts?u=/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/Chrysler_building-_top.jpg

http://picturesofmoscow.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/spring-comes-stalin-skyscraper.jpg

is just rip off http://ask.com/

Searching for "The best operating system" on : bing google yahoo ask

A self-selecting Web poll for Person of the Decade, and the result is not Rick Astley?!

Run your own mail server and have a look at Ask's Eraser Feature

It's funny you should mention Jeeves, since the site formerly known as Ask Jeeves actually has better options for privacy (see the "AskEraser" feature in the upper right).

Yes, because if he had put actual thought into the recommendation, he would have suggested people use Ask.com with AskEraser turned on. It has by far the best privacy policy of the options provided by search companies.

Bing's policy is no better than Google's, and the sole decision process here seems to have been that Googe's CEO said something stupid (though factually true given currrent laws) this week, but Microsoft's CEO didn't.

But if you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines--including Google--do retain this information for some time

Actually, this part's not exactly true. At least one search engine offers an option to not be logged at all (the "Askeraser" link in the upper left). It may not be perfect--it's opt-in and does require you to accept one cookie--but it's better than any of the options that Google offers!

ObDisclaimer: I work for that company, so you don't have any particular reason to trust me, but then again, many of you already trust me with root on your systems, since I have write access to the Debian repositories. :)

The answer to your question "What motivation do they have to restrict access by some subset of users?" is: restricting access to information posted by those who oppose their political agenda is a fairly strong motive.

And as soon as that happens searchers can point their browsers to other search engines. Though I use mostly Google I still use Alta Vista. I also use About.com, Teoma (now Ask.com), Cuil, DMoz, and Mooter.

Falcon

http://www.ask.com/web?q=why+does+pepsi+suck

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=?p=why+does+pepsi+suck

Bing is just bad.

Google.com:
Why Windows Vista and Office 2007 are so Expensive
http://www.google.com/search?q=why+is+windows+so+expensive%3F

Yahoo.com:
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=why+is+windows+so+expensive%3F&ei=UTF-8&fr=moz35
why so expensive? "... Windows Forums ... why are macbooks so expensive i mean i saw a better windows p"

Answers.com:
WikiAnswers: Why are Mac's so expensive?
http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?s=why+is+windows+so+expensive%3F&gwp=13

Ask.com
Why Windows Vista and Office 2007 are so Expensive
http://www.ask.com/web?q=why+is+windows+so+expensive%3F&search=search&qsrc=0&o=0&l=dir

It is worth trying it for yourself:

http://www.cuil.com/search?q=Why+is+Windows+so+expensive%3F

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Why+is+Windows+so+expensive%3F

http://www.bing.com/search?q=Why+is+Windows+so+expensive%3F

http://us.ask.com/web?q=Why+is+Windows+so+expensive%3F

http://www.cuil.com/search?q=Why+is+Windows+so+expensive%3F

http://www.altavista.com/web/results?itag=ody&q=Why+is+Windows+so+expensive%3F&kgs=1&kls=0

I guess there is no conspiracy at all, just different weights in the ordering algorithm... but hey, it is a cool experiment... unless maybe they are also colluding with CocaCola

http://www.altavista.com/web/results?itag=ody&q=why+does+pepsi+sucks%3F&kgs=1&kls=0
http://www.bing.com/search?q=why+does+pepsi+sucks%3F&go=&form=QBLH&qs=n

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=why+does+pepsi+sucks%3F&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&fp=CSrKZrhT3_U

Been there, done that.

All that is old is new again.

No no one's...

http://www.yahoo.com/
http://www.msn.com/
http://www.about.com/
http://www.ask.com/br? etc

Google is a verb.

Altavista, Hotbot, and MSN are not verbs. Yahoo! tried to make its name a verb(with their "Do you Yahoo?" slogan) but failed. Ask is a verb, but unlike Google, Ask was born a verb, it wasn't made one because of its ubiquity and popularity among the masses.

stewart airport/AFB in upstate NY (SWF) contradicts this...

Here's the google map zoomed in

and here is the same area on ask.com(click satellite after it loads... link doens't go to satellite view).

note: if you drag off to the edge of the airport on the google map, resolution pciks up drastically after you cross the street, so it's no just an inexplicably crappy area

so is ask.com's provider breaking national security regs and google's isn't or is google blurring?

Ask.com has AskEraser. Here's the description.

Google is getting in everybody's space

While Google's there when I want it, they aren't in my space.

Google's products are not generally better, (often flakey or worse (consider google docs and gmail - so what? the only advantage they offer is that they are free

Unless your employer, or you for that matter, demand you use Google's apps you don't have to. Even if you want free software, a lot of the software on my computer is open source, I have none of Google's software on it. I don't even use gmail.

They have already destroyed the search market because only crazy people would start up a search company and go up against them.

Google has gained dominance in searches because it offers better searches than most other search engines. However the new SE Cuil looks pretty good too. I haven't really used it yet but I also use About.com, Alta Vista, Teoma, oops Ask.com, and Open Directory Project for searches.

They are busily destroying most other markets too.

And what markets are these?

Falcon

'here are strategic reasons to not want a single source for a critical material. There are no such strategic reasons relating to Google.'

I'd rate data as pretty critical

I can, and do, go to Teoma, oops Ask.com, About.com, Alta Vista, and Dmoz Open Directory Project for searches. And I may start using Cuil as well for searching. Google isn't the only search engine, nor does it have lockin, other than being a good search engine. Actually I use About.com because Google referred me to it, when I first googled for "Monte Verde" archeology the top result was About.com's section of Monte Verde. Now it's number three. Googling for photography returns About.com as number 4.

While data may be, is critical, it can be gotten from search engines other than Google.

Falcon

You're changing whole story there. I said "OS X is not FreeBSD"

Maybe that's the problem. As I see it if someone takes FreBSD but modifies it it's still FreeBSD. Unless the mods are extensive. The different distros of Linux do the same but they're all still Linux.

If you're going to put words into my mouth and try and argue against something I never said, I gotta figure you're trolling me.

I'm not trying to troll, as I say above I don't have a problem calling OS X FreeBSD even if it has been modified some. The two of us, you and I, are using different definitions.

n the beginning, there was UNIX, First Edition.

Yea, I know. Unix was created by Brian W. C. Kernighan & Dennis M. Ritchie, who wrote C to program Unix. They did it while working at ATT Bell Lab.

Sixth Edition was also released outside AT&T as Version 6 UNIX. This was the first version of UNIX to be widely used outside AT&T.

That I didn't know, or recall. I thought the first major release of Unix outside of ATT was Berkeley Software Distribution, BSD, created at UC Berkeley.

Then Bill Gates fell in love with the Macintosh, and decided that Microsoft had to have their own macintosh, and dumped Xenix on a Microsoft spinoff called the Santa Cruz Operation, or SCO.

I may be wrong but I thought SCO, Santa Cruz Operation, was an independent company coming out of the hacker culture in California. Let me check wiki... According to wiki Santa Cruz Operation licensed Xenix from Microsoft in 1983 but Doug Michels founded the company in 1978. Is wiki wrong? Doing a quick search of "Doug Michels" "Santa Cruz Operation" I come up with the same thing. "1979: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. (SCO) is founded by Larry Michels and his son, Doug".

Thanks for the history on Unix, BSD, and OS X. I knew parts of it but not all you have here. I didn't mean to troll, I just didn't know all you seem to, then there's difference in definitions.

Falcon

I didn't know that there were only two search engines in the U.S. market...