Slashdot Mirror

I'm sorry, but thats not quite right. Close, but not quite.

The OEM restrictions you speak of DO exist. If you upgrade the motherboard in a system, yes, you would have to get a new license (I'll leave this point to the reader, to determine the fairness of).

However, it seems that replacing a damaged motherboard in an existing, OEM licensed system is allowed. See http://weblog.infoworld.com/gripeline/archives/2007/05/motherboard_rep.html for more info (which incidentally, also describes the tie-in to the motherboard. A small excerpt: "...Microsoft acknowledges that replacing a defective motherboard should not require the OS to be re-licensed." So it seems replacing a defective mobo is ok within the license terms. Upgrading is not.

More troubling, though, is another site which points to only replacing of the mobo under warrenty being allowed.

Now, if you want to point fingers, point them at the lack of this statement regarding motherboard upgrades in the EULA, where it is notably lacking. MS needs to get it's act together in this regard, because right now this information is very difficult to come by. If it takes an experienced person a half dozen google searches to figure it out, then Joe sixpack is not going to have a clue.

Additionally, a quick web search came back with about double the price for home premium full retail vs oem. ~$100 vs ~$200. This is of course just a quick search, I'm sure you could find varied pricing on both. Bottom line, it's not just a few bucks.

Well seeing how the white-space technology failed the FCC test to show that it wouldn't cause interference that really might have soemthing to do with it.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/08/07/FCC-pans-white-space-device_1.html

... Now, sitting on the floor in front Barcelona, I am speechless. I'm running all eight cores, full-out, and watching the watt/ammeter keep a record. The evening started with an all-nigt burn in. During the systems' first all-night toughest load, with 100% for each of eight cores, I didn't expect when I saw: 2 amps, measured at the outlet, or just 300 watts. When the workload dropped to idle in came in at 1.3 amp, or 149 watts.
 
It was not a wimpily-configured box: 8 GB Registered ECC DRAM, on-board I/O, memory and SMP node controllers on-board. Two banks of RAM for each socket, and I'll explain when I get to the result, a third-level cache turned out to be a major win.
 
I'm barely getting warmed up, and yet I'm weary, but after everthing I learned, it's the price that got my blood boiling: $389! That's desktop chip money. So AMD is blazing trails in more ways than one.

You've just rewritten the news. MS did not laugh; indeed they were the first to report that one of their employees had gone out of bounds with email promises. Literally within hours they contacted the two partners who had been sent the improper emails, saying basically 'disregared that, it's wrong'. If the Evil MS Borg had these companies so completely enthralled as some have suggested, it would have ended there and no one would be the wiser. But no ... it was Microsoft who contacted the Swedish Institute of Standards to explain that an impropriety had occurred. SIS then abstained from the vote.

Through MS's own, conscious actions, they ended up losing Sweden's vote. Hardly something to laugh openly about.

aside FrOm the above example, CUPS is nOw something that they own, so I guess that it Doesn't apply, but I was thinking of systeMs like that. you May also care to read this article that Mentions darwin being GLP/APSL but doesn't clarify issues.

There are Data and Music CDRs.

Yeah, that's the RIAA tax for you. Everyone at that technology challenged outfit thought the CD Audio recorder would replace the cassette recorder and work the same way. They had absolutely no idea that a COMPUTER could be used for audio recording on plain data disks until it was too late. Still, I'm surprised the regular data CD-R didn't get litigated into oblivion by the RIAA but once the Genie is out of the bottle, oh well. The other approach is the European way (the UK at least) - tax everything as if it was going to be used for music.

On copiers, I used to work for Xerox and have some exposure to the copyright violation issues being raised then. It wasn't anywhere NEAR what's going on now but it was still a background issue. We even had some photosensitive drums inside etched with tiny serial numbers which made permanent records of what machine something was copied on. The Russian Embassy had those.

...government wiretaps should be defeated by playing RIAA music in the background and then letting the RIAA sue the government for supporting terrorism by stealing music

Heh... except you'd be sued for a public performance of a copyrighted work without a license. I could go for watching Congress spontaneously combust on C-SPAN, though.

This "OpenXML" stunt is just a smokescreen covering Microsofts controlled retreat in the office format battle. It only needs to keep parties distracted until Microsoft has reclaimed the control over business content by means of vendor lockin v2.0 aka Microsoft Office Sharepoint Server.

http://weblog.infoworld.com/openresource/archives/ 2007/04/while_you_were.html
http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/mia/?p=198

But do they have more to gain from selling the hardware, or from their cut of the revenue? Estimates of profits on the hardware are anywhere from 23% ($138) to 55% ($329) of the cost of the phones (for the $599 iPhone, not sure about the $499 one). According to your links, Apple gets either $3 per contract ($72 over 2 years) or $11 ($264 over 2 years), depending on whether the AT&T customer is new to AT&T or not.

Depending on the balance of new customers to old (and 4GB iPhones to 8GB iPhones), Apple may just make more money by letting people buy the phone and use it with any provider, especially considering that the legal fees to try to enforce the locked phone policy would probably wipe out any difference in revenue from lost AT&T customers. That's provided that AT&T doesn't make too much of a stink with Apple about it. In any case, I'm sure the number of people who actually will end up unlocking their phones will be relatively small, so even AT&T doesn't have much to worry about, and Apple can enjoy those few extra sales that they'll get from it.

And just recently, about 1.6 million data records were stolen from the job application site monster.com - including among other things name, email, telephone numbers, address and which area a user would like to work in. Quite the wet dream of any spammer. http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/08/20/Monster. com-identity-attack_1.html

Almost all of the many predictions now being made about 1996 hinge on the Internet's continuing exponential growth. But I predict the Internet, which only just recently got this section here in InfoWorld, will soon go spectacularly supernova and in 1996 catastrophically collapse. Here's why there soon will be only World Wide Web ghost pages

Choice quotes from this article written at the close of 1995:

My understanding is that the data rate for QKD is too low for practical use as a one-time pad - e.g. this article talks about a system at 13Kbps, which is somewhat slower than the best commercial systems but is hugely slower than the rate of data you would typically want to transmit. You can only transmit a few hundred keys per second, and have to use them in a standard non-OTP encryption algorithm on the non-quantum high-speed data channel.

Take a look at the SonicWALL CDP 1440i. It is designed for small businesses looking for easy to manage backup. http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/08/17/34TCsoni c_1.html As a bonus, it can also back up to an online storage center.

Between this:

QUOTE STEVE BALLMER: "We are hell bent and determined to allocate the talent, resources, money, and innovation to become a powerhouse in the advertising business,"

http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/07/26/Ballmer- asks-Microsoft-investors-to-be-patient_1.html

AND, this:

Will Microsoft Put The Colonel in the Kernel?

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/14/043200

Steve Ballmer is BAD NEWS for Microsoft & he is NOT a computer science person (so, what's he doing leading a company that IS about that?)

And don't bother to TRY to tell me it's his "Business skills", lol!

That'd be COMPLETE b.s. - Because anyone can take something & make it for a dollar, & sell it for 2 dollars to cover costs + profit (big brains required, not!), period! Especially a company your BUDDY started & got you into because you were his buddy, AND THIS IS ALL THAT IS, as to his position in that company, period.

Steve Ballmer is just plain NOWHERE NEAR THE INTELLIGENCE OF HIS PREDECESSOR Mr. Bill Gates, in terms of mental abilities or poise either!

(Especially after seeing the "Monkey Boy Dance", that only made me believe the guy has issues of somekind, or is on drugs, to be honest - these "remedies" of his? Greed... pure, unecessary greed NO doubt about it!).

What Ballmer's after is ONLY going to drive folks from Microsoft product usages over time, mark my words.

"Your ideas are completely batshit stupid." - by Kalriath (849904) on Sunday July 29, @10:17PM (#20037447)

Kalriath, lol, I guess you like to come off as looking "SO BATSHIT SMART", right? First of all: Your use of profanity makes you look foolish, & secondly?? WHAT ideas of mine are you talking about and ranting on here??? Be specific in your reply IF possible.

"Apparently bankruptcy is the only way they can make peace. Actually, your post is proof that the open source community really is all about getting stuff without paying." - by Kalriath (849904) on Sunday July 29, @10:17PM (#20037447)

Thirdly???? Your statements + 'accusations' lack any backing substantiation period for your "conclusions"!

E.G.-> You say I stated some things that I never did (like about bankruptcy for Microsoft, which is probably damn near impossible considering their wealth as a corporate body... OR, my saying I was unwilling to pay for things)!

Would you care to show me WHERE I said these things?? Good luck, because I never once did.

I.E.-> Those "conclusions" of yours only make you look like someone with dyslexia or other reading difficulties, because I never said anything about bankruptcies for MS, or not paying for tools used in development etc. et al.

That all said & aside - Why don't YOU try to read & COMPREHEND, prior to shooting your mouth off?

APK

P.S.=> "Just read yourself, and you'll see you look like an arrogant git" - by Kalriath (849904) on Sunday July 29, @10:17PM (#20037447)

AND, Kalriath "the crude"? Here is a recommendation for you, above all else, because of your reply directed to me without any specifics or substantiation as to your words directed my way that "put words into my mouth" I never once stated:

Go to a doctor, get some meds for your dyslexia, & then, post here, ok? Those meds might help in your case to SOME degree, in helping you form replies here (ones that make sense @ least & are on topic)... apk

"The new AT&T posted operating revenue of $15.84 billion during the first quarter of this year, which ended March 31." (2006) http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/04/25/77742_HN at&tprofit_1.html

"Google reported its second quarter results Thursday, posting revenues of $3.87 billion, up 58% from the same quarter last year and a 6% increase from the first quarter of 2007." (2007) http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6461591 .html

So yeah, AT&T's operating revenue is about 4 times that of Google. I could not find data on if/how much AT&T's revenue is rising, though. With Google's pending purchase of DoubleClick, you can expect that to rise... I'm not sure how much DoubleClick's revenue is, as they are no longer a publicly traded company - but back in 2005 they were posting revenues of 300mil and rising. AT&T's different markets are performing differently; stand-alone long distance is way down (over 20%), while Cingular's revenue rose 9% over the quarter. Cingular is the biggest money-maker for AT&T, posting about 9 billion dollars in revenue.

If AT&T wanted to, they could probably out-bid GOOG. But will they? As previously noted, they've recanted their opposition to the regulations. So even if they did win, the regulations might still stand - which can only be a good thing. I wonder what Apple has to say about all this, given their lock-in deals with the iPhone?

And he said in TFA that he uses Windows so he MUST have read the EULA at one time or another. Unless he decided it was too complicated and just clicked-through. I'm with you, this is either a TROLL or he's incompetent to write such an article since at the very least, he should have also discussed the MS EULA.

There was a really good article on the MS XP EULA called "Windows XP EULA in Plain English" by linuxadvocate.org but that site seems to be gone and I can't find a mirror or PDF of it. Just a small hint of how bad the MS EULA is can be found in this short article which states that Microsoft has in their EULA that they are not liable for breach of contract. Read on, it's just a page or two long:
http://weblog.infoworld.com/gripeline/archives/200 6/09/a_contract_only.html

LoB

Probably the most significant event was the lack of a global crisis -- you know, a Slammer- or Blaster-style worm that infects the world in eight minutes. There was no malware with a replication magnitude on the order of Code Red, Slammer, Nimda, or the Iloveyou virus.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/12/30/01OPseca dvise_1.html?9809798

you should read more.

Wow. I thought the whole world had heard about this one... Any google search on Torvalds and bitkeeper will tell you: http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/05/02/18OPopen ent_1.html

How is the average customer trapped by Verizon cutting the last mile of copper? Many customers are already too far from the CO to qualify for the theoretical 3.0m/768k "broadband" service offered via Verizon DSL. Unless you are a U-Verse customer, you can't get TV over copper. As for basic home telephone service, FiOS Telephone is as federally regulated as POTS, with one exception--Verizon does not have to wholesale elements in its FTTP network with competing telcos, although it does allow them to resell lines. You pay taxes & tariffs (the "USF") and can apply Lifeline ("welfare telephone") credits to FiOS Telephone service. Many new landline only installs are FiOS now, because they are more reliable, easier to manage and cheaper to maintain then POTS. Although FiOS Telephone is limited by ~6 hrs of backup power, it is more reliable overall, especially in rural areas. As for telephony, almost everyone nowadays has a cell phone. Wireless telephone reliability & QoS is rapidly approaching that of POTS. During emergencies, When the cell stations fail, service providers like Verizon dispatch cells-on-wheels http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/09/06/HNrestor eneworleans_1.html/ to keep the lifelines open. Broadband enthusiasts have been begging for Fiber To The Premises for years. At last, one provider has taken the plunge and bet the farm on fiber, wiring 1 million customers at ~$1000 apiece, and you bitch when they pave over the dirt roads? Besides, there is far more wholesaling going on right now in POTS then actual cuts in the network. Verizon would much rather sell off the copper plant at a loss than destroy it--check out the Fairpoint Communications deal. Most of these last mile cuts were done in areas where FiOS, cable, and other services are available to consumers and POTS/DSL is simply not attractive at any price. If you insist on keeping your dirt road intact when upgrading to FiOS, tell the billing/orders rep that you require it for emergency use, such as a Lifealert type system. She will be more than happy to oblige ;)

> One might speculate that it's a good thing for linux (and mac) that China runs on Windows. Um no. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/01/04/red_flag_l inux_beats_out/ http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/09/04/HNredfla g_1.html

Present This Our new Venture, www.immuneid.com - Patented and ready to be a terrific oportunity to move on. Immune ID works in a very simple, safe and practical way. With Immune ID on documents, credit cards and credentials, the identification device on them will always remain deactivated unless the user activates them through physical touch. Without human contact, any reading and/or writing attempt will fail. Thus, your information is protected from harmful use. The user will also have a visual and/or audio confirmation included in the device*. Immune ID is an innovative protection system for all electronic documents using technologies such as RFID, Rubee, Smart Dots, EAS, etc.: passports, credit cards, driving licenses, access cards, etc. Some recent and important information regarding the Immune ID initiative. Hillary Clinton Initiative: http://www.washingtontechnology.com/online/1_1/298 88-1.html?topic=daily_news (following our communication) http://rfidlawblog.mckennalong.com/archives/federa l-legislation-senator-hillary-clinton-to-introduce -comprehensive-consumer-privacy-legislation .html US Passports Shield Demo Vulnerabilities http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XXaqraF7pI http://www.theregister.com/2007/03/06/daily_mail_p assport_clone/ http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/02/26/HNblackh atrfid_1.html http://www.infoworld.com/video/archives/2007/02/rs a_ioactive.html Translated article appearing in German site about Immune ID http://64.233.179.104/translate_c?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&o e=UTF-8&langpair=de%7Cen&u=http://www.gulli.com/ne ws/immuneid-den-angeblichen-2007-01-24/&prev=/lang uage_tools Sincerely, - Fernando Catania fernando@immuneid.com

Present This Our new Venture, www.immuneid.com - Patented and ready to be a terrific oportunity to move on. Immune ID works in a very simple, safe and practical way. With Immune ID on documents, credit cards and credentials, the identification device on them will always remain deactivated unless the user activates them through physical touch. Without human contact, any reading and/or writing attempt will fail. Thus, your information is protected from harmful use. The user will also have a visual and/or audio confirmation included in the device*. Immune ID is an innovative protection system for all electronic documents using technologies such as RFID, Rubee, Smart Dots, EAS, etc.: passports, credit cards, driving licenses, access cards, etc. Some recent and important information regarding the Immune ID initiative. Hillary Clinton Initiative: http://www.washingtontechnology.com/online/1_1/298 88-1.html?topic=daily_news (following our communication) http://rfidlawblog.mckennalong.com/archives/federa l-legislation-senator-hillary-clinton-to-introduce -comprehensive-consumer-privacy-legislation .html US Passports Shield Demo Vulnerabilities http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XXaqraF7pI http://www.theregister.com/2007/03/06/daily_mail_p assport_clone/ http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/02/26/HNblackh atrfid_1.html http://www.infoworld.com/video/archives/2007/02/rs a_ioactive.html Translated article appearing in German site about Immune ID http://64.233.179.104/translate_c?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&o e=UTF-8&langpair=de%7Cen&u=http://www.gulli.com/ne ws/immuneid-den-angeblichen-2007-01-24/&prev=/lang uage_tools Sincerely, - Fernando Catania fernando@immuneid.com

Maybe the issue is taking advantage of the instructions in a particular way. Like the old, old pentuim flaw that caused the calculator program in windows 3.1/95? to display an incorrect result if numbers were calculated a certain and specific way.

Apple might be taking advantage of it, but it might not be on the same way Microsoft does.

There's a difference between power and abuse. Google is scary, but Microsoft has already got a toe hold in equally as much info as Google, for fucks sake it's written out in your EULA, M$ claimed that shit long ago.

"Given the text of the article, and section headers like "The Desperate Panic of the Apple Haters", you can't really take it seriously as an analysis."

OK, here's some serious analysis for you...

Better?

Fact#1: No, DRM has nothing to do with file copying, that is FUD. There is a known bug about the 'estimation' process, and you can find a hotfix on the net as one of my techs just reminded me. The DRM in Vista is 'protected processes' i.e. processes that no other process can gain access to even with admin rights. This is part DRM implemntation and part security. However it does not come into play when copying files, DRMed files are internally flagged, and copy as regular files, it is when they are tried to be played on another computer does the DRM check ever happen. Also this is just WMA, WMV, and works like XP. And the playback 'protected pipelines' truly don't come into play on copy media.

Fact#2: Aero does NOT consume more battery power. Aero was a concern in Beta, and there were some bad GPU drivers 'in beta', but since the release of Vista, this is SO not the case. Go find articles where people actually test this. There are 'reasons' why Aero makes up for itself by saving performance in diferent areas. If you think about it, the composer is keeping vector and bitmap applications from having to redraw the window all the time, so this would help offset other GPU usage. Pushing Vector and Bitmap data from RAM to the screen is NOT sucking or using much 3D power, truly...

Here are the first Google links I found, go find others, I think even a few gaming mags and Toms have done reports on this as well refuting the Aero battery drain myths.

http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/arc hive/2007/05/14/aero-and-battery-life.aspx

http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisedesktop/arch ives/2007/05/the_vista_aero.html

Fact #3: There is still issues with file security where the don't give the administrator of the computer access to certain directives. You have to go in and change ownership, give me a fucking break. Like I want to spend time a clients house to deal with that shit?

This is somewhat true, but this is called security. I know it is new to the Windows world and strange to everyone else because MS has not given Windows Vista users an equivalent to root account, as even as Administrator with UAC off, certain system level files have higher security. However, as you state, you can take ownership and do what you want with them. So MS actually putting 'better' security in an OS is bad how again?

Games seem to run slow on my machine, maybe I need more memeory, but I have two gigs... I get 10 frames per second less on all my games. But it could be my machine, it seems more like a driver thing though.

Actually you should check out drivers, and see if newer versions don't pull a bit more performance out of your system.

Here are a couple of tips.

ATI Cards, version 9.2 seems to be faster for lower end cards.

ATI 14xx - 29xx the newest driver is faster.

NVidia FX 5xxx series 97.19 is currently the fastest driver.

NVidida 6xxx-8xxx usually the latest or one of the latest beta drivers are the fastest. (Find new and Beta NVidia drivers on www.laptopvideo2go.com, even for desktops, as they seems to stay up on versions and also offer updated INFs for non-standard chipsets.)

The January drivers or the in box Vista drivers are truly slower than XP, this is accepted by everyone. However, the Feb-Current drivers for Vista are on par with XP for most people in terms of performance. Like I said the WDDM required ATI/NVidia to write the drivers from scratch and since then they have been fixing and profiling games for optimal performance, which they had the luxury of years of testing on XP that no longer applies for the Vista Drivers.

Our techs tend to dispell the 'games are slower' on Vista by demonstrating a DirectX game and an OpenGL game running in a Window with Aero enabled, and sho

(or at least paid lip service) to open standards

I agree with you on that specific point.

not based on threatening their costumers with patent violation bullshit, breaking the law, or strong arming unfairly their business partners.

The facts prove otherwise. Here's one example that made it to the media from just last year: http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/05/04/78065_HN sunsuesazul_1.html It's important to note, few patent issues ever get as far as the courts. Sun and other corporations like it just collect their vig or bury the company with litigation costs if they are viewed as an actual threat.

Sun has behaved mostly impeccably
Get back to me when you speak to a VAR that specs Sun products who is bidding on the same contract as Sun. Sun eats their babies when they get the opportunity. All the big vendors do it.

Some people have this paranoid view of corporations out to screw anybody in order to make profits.
That's not paranoia. Sun's first duty is to return a profit on the company's assets. Everything else just doesn't matter. Your belief that Sun is somehow better is misguided at best.

Clearly you have not been in a situation where _you_ are standing in the way of something Sun wants. In this situation, Sun wants more Solaris users and Linus stands in the way.

According to documents which the Coast Guard provided to the Committee (mere hours before the hearing) the Coast Guard confessed that during the Bluewater projects the Coast Guard only provided one or specification was provided to Lockheed Martin in regards to the this series of ships being required to protect classified information was "MIL-HDBK-232, Red/Black Engineering - Installation Guidelines.", and that there were zero... get this... ZERO other TEMPEST requires, measurements, or guidelines listed in the contract spec.

In turn this allowed LM to deliver nothing of value in regards to TEMPEST, but wait, it gets even worse. Lockheed Martin even ignored the requirements of MIL-HDBK-232, so that when they delivered the they were not in compliance with even the single TEMPEST related specification they were given as part of the contract.

It's not a dupe. It's a backup, to assure reliability. Here's a backup of my comment to the earlier story:

The big loser is Gateway. Would you buy a Gateway computer after reading the Slashdot article?

An appeal means that the case is no longer in small claims court. Both parties can then hire a lawyer. An appeal means that Gateway exposes itself to more attention.

The company is apparently unable to manage itself: Jury finds former Gateway execs manipulated earnings.

Okay, maybe the story is not a backup. Maybe Zonk is zonked.

Yes, I realize that. I also realize that the Turion is the mobile variant of the Athlon 64. I also realize that until recently, AMD's chips were outperforming Intel's on the desktop. AMD's laptop chips are slow, hot and not terribly efficient compared to the C2D. Intel's mobile chips are better. Hence, more expensive. The C2D is 64-bit, just like the Turion, uses less power and is much faster. AMD has never been able to compete with Intel's mobile line, which is why their mobile chips are cheap and only used in low-end laptops these days.

They are indeed made from similar components, just as every car is made of similar components. Or tables. Or chairs. Or any product line really. Most furniture is made of wood or metal, but I think most people would agree that an Ethan Allen is going to be better than an IKEA. Design counts for quite a bit, not just in looks, but durability. Both laptops are made of metal and plastic, but the polycarbonate shell of the MacBook is much more durable. Not to mention the MacBook is still thinner, lighter and smaller. There are only two trial apps (easily removed), compared to the bloatware crap Dell puts on the Inspirons. I will say that the Latitudes (I use one at work) and Mobile Precisions aren't bad, but every Inspiron I've seen looks and feels cheap and poorly designed and assembled.

Oh, and when it comes to customer satisfaction, Apple is on top.

Notebook sales are increasing faster than desktop sales. http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/10/21/HNlaptop sales_1.html

If you compare same spec machines to what Apple offers, the other machines are similar in price or more expensive than Apple.

Apple doesn't really compete for the low end market. So if you want a 500.00 desktop, the specs on it will not match to anything Apple sell except maybe the Mac Mini.

If you want a real workhorse you will pay way more than 500.00.

"This poor guy now faces daunting reality of having to litigate this on appeal against Gateway...By winning, he's lost."

The big loser is Gateway. Now, the company cannot win. Would you buy a Gateway computer after reading the Slashdot article? Not likely.

An appeal means that the case is no longer in small claims court. Both parties can then hire a lawyer.

An appeal means that Gateway exposes itself to more attention.

Gateway in the news: Jury finds former Gateway execs manipulated earnings.

That's total FUD.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/12/04/HNnovell openxml_1.html
http://www.dataviz.com/

OpenXML has/is being implemented by 3rd parties.

So you're saying you know for a fact that there are no patents covering anything in the ODF standard? If so why did Sun produce a convenant not to sue ODF developers?

Well it seems like I'm answering my own question...

http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/12/04/HNnovell openxml_1.html

Novell is supplying openxml support for OpenOffice.

Datavis already seems to provide support for OpenXML

http://www.dataviz.com/

So I guess some people have managed to decipher Microsoft's documentation.

The first link google, yahoo and live bring up...

http://weblog.infoworld.com/realitycheck/archives/ 2007/05/odf_vs_openxml.html

Not so favourable to your argument. It basically says exactly the same thing I did, this is a battle between Microsoft and a bunch of companies competing against Microsoft for market dominance.

The second link on google...

http://opendocumentfellowship.org/introduction/odf _vs_oxml

Is of course more favourable to your argument. Yet it seems the best they can come up with is that OpenXML isn't well supported yet.

There are a shitload of sites that host malicious code to intentionally infect vulnerable browsers. Even regular sites are occasionally hacked to host malicious code. The most recent big name one I can think of is the Miami Dolphins football team website during the last superbowl. A few years back a number of sites that produce banner advertisements were hacked, which resulted in widespread malicious banners getting hosted on tons of otherwise secure sites. I don't know of any database of malicious websites, but http://isc.sans.org/ usually has a good daily handlers report that lists widespread nastiness and other new developments.

Link to info on the Dolphins hack:
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/02/02/HNdolphi nssiteshacked_1.html

I don't think your parallel parallels that well what's up in Germany. Maybe this should be somewhat closer: First, there was a large influx of SuSe Lunux into the goverment sector (Over 500 German government agencies using open source). Then, a few years later, SuSe turns commercial.

I don't think your parallel parallels that well what's up in Germany. Maybe this should be somewhat closer: First, there was a large influx of SuSe Lunux into the goverment sector (Over 500 German government agencies using open source). Then, a few years later, SuSe turns commercial.

Given that he hasn't received a penalty yet, I'm willing to guess "no." The harshest penalty I'm aware of for a spammer was the seven year, 3.5 year minimum term with $16.4 million fine issued by Elliot Spitzer/NY to Howard Carmack (the "Buffalo Spammer".) However, this isn't exactly something I follow, so there may be something more severe elsewhere.

Following the links from the article I ended up here which does explicitly state that Microsoft and Novell will collaborate to improve interoperability between Microsoft Office and OpenOffice, also between Microsoft Active Directory and Novell eDirectory.

Unfortunately all the links in that article to the SEC filings are 404s.

I tried to scour the links on the crappy linked article for some lengthy, contract looking page for more details. The closest was this: http://weblog.infoworld.com/openresource/archives/ 2007/05/novell_microsof_1.html

On top of that, the links on that page that go to a SEC page are broke. WTF? I did just roll out of bed but are there good links?

"Ars Technica, Toms Hardware Guide..."

Ars Technica is too non-specific. Tom's Hardware Guide has too many ads; I wonder how much of what is written there is just hype to get paid ads.

Can't do without Ed Foster's Gripelog. How else can you discover that it is not just you who has trouble with Dell technical support? See, for example: May 10, 2007: College Kid Learns Lesson About Dell's Warranty.

Ed Foster's readers have sometimes even rated Dell more abusive than Microsoft. Awesome achievement for Dell!

But what happened to the Ed Foster's Gripelog website? It's been offline for perhaps a week. ("Phone in your tech gripes toll-free: 888-875-7916.")

You say Walmart is selling low quality versions of products, and hiding that fact.

The problem I have with that is that Dell is a very low-quality supplier, too. It isn't just Walmart that may lower the value of the Dell trademark, Dell has done that itself.

My experience with Dell is that technical support is extremely abusive. See, for example: May 10, 2007, College Kid Learns Lesson About Dell's Warranty.

My experience with Dell is that if you give Dell an email address you will get spammed forever. There is a link to unsubscribe, but it doesn't work.

What happened to Ed Foster's Gripelog? It's been offline for perhaps a week. ("Phone in your tech gripes toll-free: 888-875-7916.")

really, google looks like a blackhole, where nothing comes out from

Desperately seeking Jotspot
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/05/17/Desperat ely-seeking-JotSpot_1.html

when are we going to seek Feedburner?

The Inquirer has an article about this.

Is it a commercial success? We shall see. The ME II tag looks like it's beginning to stick. Another new client OS in 2009 makes the comparison even more pointed. Testimonials like these can't help vista.

Caldera bought DR-DOS from Novell in 1996, for $400 thousand, long after the alleged damage to the product had been done. The company settled with Microsoft over the DR-DOS lawsuit for an 'undisclosed sum' in January 2000, which Microsoft valued at $155 mn, but others speculated was actually 'much higher'.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/600488.stm

http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/ArticleID/804 5/8045.html?Ad=1

In August 2000, Caldera agreed to acquire the Santa Cruz Operation's Unix products, including UnixWare and the SCO name. Caldera later changed its name to The SCO Group, but Caldera management remained in charge, i.e. the company was actually Caldera, not the old Santa Cruz Operation, which became Tarantella, and in 2005 was acquired by Sun Microsystems.

http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/00/08/02/ 000802hncaldera.html

http://www.sun.com/software/tarantella/index.xml

Caldera's financial statements (see www.sec.gov) show it lost more money in 1999 and 2000 than its total revenue for each year, and had negative cash flows from operations. How was such a company able to issue equity that investors actually bought, pay for its ongoing losses and come up with enough money to acquire and sustain UnixWare, another loss-making business, along with the SCO name, in a deal valued at $91 mn? The answer is that the entire operation was funded by the DR-DOS lawsuit.

http://practical-tech.com/operating-system/linux/c aldera-buys-sco-unix-professional-services/

http://www.newsforge.com/os/04/03/30/0047220.shtml

IANAL, but couldnt the statements that M$ employees made about Linux infringing XXX many patents be considered slander?

Judging from the SCO case (where the unspecified claims were based on copyright instead of patents) this is probably not possible in the US.

But most other countries take it very serious when a company tries to distort the market with such claims. In Germany a settlement after a temporary restraining order on Germany meant that SCO could no longer spread their lies in Germany.

Because the law is more protective of the free market in the EU, and because the EU already has it's eye on Microsoft for anti-competitive behaviour, Microsoft risks big trouble in the EU because of their unspecified claims.

This person at InfoWorld thinks Microsoft must really be hurting for them to be saying these things.

Bill Gates recently testified before Congress saying that there were enough open tech jobs in the country to justify "unlimited" H-1B workers! The Washington Post even says that there's a bounty being paid by some companies (SRA International, Inc., in the article). (Both articles accessed May 04, 2007.) With IBM freeing up all these tech workers for other jobs, surely we won't need a relaxed H-1B program in the U.S.

Yes, mod me insightful or troll. It's sort of both.