1) If you are large enough to have 500 users and your IT guy(s) cant keep track of 500 keys you should fire them.
2) For large numbers of installs you would typically get a site license anyways.
3) If the product is installed on your computer it probably wanted a product key on installation. This means its on the computer, you cant lose it so if you get audited you dont have to worry about missing cd keys. As long as you didnt break the rules when you installed you are ok.
My understanding is that the BSA wants to see unique licenses. Where do you get this idea that they want a receipt from best buy from x number of years ago? That would be much easier to forge than a set of unique valid keys. Do you have a source for that?
Except that the logistics are nowhere near what you are making them out to be. If you have unique product keys installed you should be ok. And you dont even need an IT department that is competent enough to keep track of a few numbers, the product key is usually stored on the computer when you install it. Really they are only going to get upset with you if you have 500 computers all using the same product key. And if that happens you really deserve to get burned.
The only way that the BSA is going to come after you is if they get tipped off that you are violating your license. If that happens it means that people at your company knew they were infringing. I'm sorry, but in my world thats not gray, thats black. Having one valid license to a software product that was copied 200 times doesnt make it "gray".
I dont think this is a big company having the resources to defend themselves kind of issue. Its more likely that big companies have more money and are more inclined to go out of their way to minimise their chance of getting sued. Therefore a big company is likely to have an IT department that does a good job of making sure it has licenses for everything and doesnt cut corners to save a few bucks here and there.
Is there any other realm where the manufacturer demonizes the very people that buy the products that pay the rent? Thats the problem though, they arent buying it, they are pirating it. This whole slogan about sueing "their customers" whenever talking about a big company that owns intellectual property of whatever type seems silly to me. Obviously they arent their customers or the guy getting sued would have paid for the item and not gotten sued.
And I am pretty sure that if you stole a tv from best buy they would be demonizing you too.:)
I have always wondered what patent troll companies got out of filing for patents that obviously have loads of prior art. Have any of them ever been successful at sueing a big company for an obvious concept that has tons of prior art? I cant imagine that any of the companies listed would want to just give money to the patent troll for fear of attracting more of them.
agreed, as long as they don't call it "aid" or give the implication that they are doing this out of the "kindness" of their hearts. Every company does this. Do you think toy companies sell toys because they love children? Putting an altruistic spin on everything is something all companies do.
I really doubt it. A lot of people on here seem to be jumping to that conclusion even though TFA said nothing like that. If it actually was true dont you think it would have been mentioned?
What is wrong with that? The third world countries get free goods/services and the western governments get to stimulate their own economy. If someone gave you a free car would you get pissed that the car wasnt the one you wanted?
Providing support only to purely Windows institutes? Nasty Where did it say this in TFA? You and several others seem to be assuming that this is the case. TFA says only that they provide free training to schools that use windows. It says nothing about a requirement that the schools use no non-MS software. It seems like everyone is assuming something that isnt true.
Free training is not monopoly subsidising. Its just a different business model, they charge for the software and give free training. Other companies give away the software and make their money on support and training. There is nothing wrong with giving away free stuff (like training) in order to grow your market share.
I would like to see more competition in the consumer OS market as well and MS may have crossed the line in the past, but screaming "monopoly abuse!" every time MS makes any kind of business deal is just silly.
Why is it a surprise they would only fund free training for their own software? I mean isnt that kind of a duh thing? Are linux companies sinister too now because they dont pay for free windows training for people who dont buy linux?
Anyone can. Everyone can't. Of course everyone cant, but everyone isnt trying to raise a family either so it isnt an issue. Some people dont want to do things like pick up garbage for living. Thats fine, thats why they pay more than working at starbucks. But these jobs are available to people who need them.
They probably want to hire a janitor, not hire someone unskilled and train them to be a janitor. Are you kidding?:) Train someone to be janitor? That involves what, showing them where the mop is? Seriously, you are arguing that the job of JANITOR is an unattainable career that is difficult to break into now. Anyone who really wants to can become a janitor and make enough money to live.
A lot of these unskilled blue collar jobs are more attainable than you realize. If you show up on time, are willing to work hard, dont do drugs, and dont have a criminal record you would be considered a very desirable candidate.
Re:as the review says
on
Geekonomics
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I always thought the bridge building analogy was a little bogus.
Bridge building isnt really all that complex, there is a hell of a lot more going on in a software product of any real magnitude than in a bridge. Sure, there are a few things like wind you have to take into account, but there really arent as many variables in bridge building as there is in software development.
In addition to that, software has to be exactly perfect, with a bridge you can just say "screw it, lets reinforce/add supports/whatever here, here, and there just to be safe" and you are good to go. (I know I am oversimplifying to some degree, but you see my point) It is possible to give yourself a lot more room for error.
Software is under the eyes of regulators
on
Geekonomics
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Software written for most industries where human lives could conceivably be on the line IS under the watchful eyes of regulators. As an example, if you are going to write software that goes into an airplane you can expect to have your work audited by the FAA. Similar circumstances exist for most other industries where a software failure could cause loss of human life or similar catastrophes.
Good luck implementing an OS with Ada.:) Some of the apps built on top of the OS may be in ada, but the operating systems itself will be implemented in C.
It is substantially different. (and integrity is different from integrity-178b also)
The 653 in the name is a reference ARINC-653, which is an industry standard that specifies the api that the OS exposes to the user. (Integrity also supports this same api)
I havent used VxWorks 653, but I am very familiar with both Integrity and Intregrity-178b, and there is no question that the latter is a LOT more reliable.
There may be a little bit of code reused in these platforms, but really the name is the same for marketing reasons. (kind of like how windows CE is completely different from the windows you run on your desktop)
These OSes typically are not custom designed. (although a few in older aircraft are) There are a few commercial rtoses that are commonly used, they are specially marketed to the avionics industry as conforming the DO-178B standard. The most common would probably be Integrity-178B sold by Green Hills Software and VxWorks 653 Platform sold by Wind River.
People dont have to work for minimum wage if they dont want to, some people would rather work at those jobs. McDonalds may be a job a high schooler would want, but if someone trying to raise a family is working there then they should really reassess what they are doing. You can walk in off the street and get a job as a garbage collector and make substantially more than that. You can get a job assembling cars at Toyota with no skills other than a willingness to show up on time, two people working there for a few years is six figures worth of annual income. There are help wanted ads at the place I work for janitors, they cant find any and they are paying more than double if not triple minimum wage.
This idea that people live below the poverty line because they have no other options is just not true in America today. People work low income jobs because choose not to work full time every day. That is fine if they are single with no kids. But for someone who is raising kids to work a job that doesnt pay very much and complain that the rest of society should pick up the bill is silly in my view. Even for people who have been truly unfortunate there are programs to help get them back on their feet.
This isnt the 19th century, anyone can make a living wage if they want it. There are opportunities available for any able bodied american citizen who is willing to show up and do work.
The reason costs arent going down is because we dont have enough free market forces in play. Insurance companies paying for non-catastrophic things has driven costs for relatively simple and routine things way way up. If we eliminated or discouraged that and forced consumers to price shop we would see costs being driven down. There is a problem with health care for sure, but the answer is more free markets, not less.
Yes, but that very small set of good low level items will be priced in such a manner that people who are leveling up a character without a gift of a few hundred gold from a higher level will be unable to afford it.
Thats such a silly comparison. You might as well come along and say that one pound buys you 50 pennies so therefore the US has a better economy by a factor of 50. Noone ever intended for currencies to trade at an exact parity. (ie one euro == one dollar == one yen)
Drugs would be a lot cheaper if there was real price competition. Catastrophic insurance is a lot cheaper than you realize. Typically on the order of less than a hundred dollars a month.
Slashdot Mirror
1) If you are large enough to have 500 users and your IT guy(s) cant keep track of 500 keys you should fire them.
2) For large numbers of installs you would typically get a site license anyways.
3) If the product is installed on your computer it probably wanted a product key on installation. This means its on the computer, you cant lose it so if you get audited you dont have to worry about missing cd keys. As long as you didnt break the rules when you installed you are ok.
My understanding is that the BSA wants to see unique licenses. Where do you get this idea that they want a receipt from best buy from x number of years ago? That would be much easier to forge than a set of unique valid keys. Do you have a source for that?
When I pay may taxes is it ok for me to tell the IRS "hey, I paid 92% of my taxes, isnt that good enough for you? Whats with the witch hunt?"
If the other 8% was deliberately violated I really cant see the gray area.
Except that the logistics are nowhere near what you are making them out to be. If you have unique product keys installed you should be ok. And you dont even need an IT department that is competent enough to keep track of a few numbers, the product key is usually stored on the computer when you install it. Really they are only going to get upset with you if you have 500 computers all using the same product key. And if that happens you really deserve to get burned.
The only way that the BSA is going to come after you is if they get tipped off that you are violating your license. If that happens it means that people at your company knew they were infringing. I'm sorry, but in my world thats not gray, thats black. Having one valid license to a software product that was copied 200 times doesnt make it "gray".
I dont think this is a big company having the resources to defend themselves kind of issue. Its more likely that big companies have more money and are more inclined to go out of their way to minimise their chance of getting sued. Therefore a big company is likely to have an IT department that does a good job of making sure it has licenses for everything and doesnt cut corners to save a few bucks here and there.
And I am pretty sure that if you stole a tv from best buy they would be demonizing you too.
I have always wondered what patent troll companies got out of filing for patents that obviously have loads of prior art. Have any of them ever been successful at sueing a big company for an obvious concept that has tons of prior art? I cant imagine that any of the companies listed would want to just give money to the patent troll for fear of attracting more of them.
I really doubt it. A lot of people on here seem to be jumping to that conclusion even though TFA said nothing like that. If it actually was true dont you think it would have been mentioned?
What is wrong with that? The third world countries get free goods/services and the western governments get to stimulate their own economy. If someone gave you a free car would you get pissed that the car wasnt the one you wanted?
Free training is not monopoly subsidising. Its just a different business model, they charge for the software and give free training. Other companies give away the software and make their money on support and training. There is nothing wrong with giving away free stuff (like training) in order to grow your market share.
I would like to see more competition in the consumer OS market as well and MS may have crossed the line in the past, but screaming "monopoly abuse!" every time MS makes any kind of business deal is just silly.
Why is it a surprise they would only fund free training for their own software? I mean isnt that kind of a duh thing? Are linux companies sinister too now because they dont pay for free windows training for people who dont buy linux?
A lot of these unskilled blue collar jobs are more attainable than you realize. If you show up on time, are willing to work hard, dont do drugs, and dont have a criminal record you would be considered a very desirable candidate.
I always thought the bridge building analogy was a little bogus.
Bridge building isnt really all that complex, there is a hell of a lot more going on in a software product of any real magnitude than in a bridge. Sure, there are a few things like wind you have to take into account, but there really arent as many variables in bridge building as there is in software development.
In addition to that, software has to be exactly perfect, with a bridge you can just say "screw it, lets reinforce/add supports/whatever here, here, and there just to be safe" and you are good to go. (I know I am oversimplifying to some degree, but you see my point) It is possible to give yourself a lot more room for error.
Software written for most industries where human lives could conceivably be on the line IS under the watchful eyes of regulators. As an example, if you are going to write software that goes into an airplane you can expect to have your work audited by the FAA. Similar circumstances exist for most other industries where a software failure could cause loss of human life or similar catastrophes.
Good luck implementing an OS with Ada. :) Some of the apps built on top of the OS may be in ada, but the operating systems itself will be implemented in C.
It is substantially different. (and integrity is different from integrity-178b also)
The 653 in the name is a reference ARINC-653, which is an industry standard that specifies the api that the OS exposes to the user. (Integrity also supports this same api)
I havent used VxWorks 653, but I am very familiar with both Integrity and Intregrity-178b, and there is no question that the latter is a LOT more reliable.
There may be a little bit of code reused in these platforms, but really the name is the same for marketing reasons. (kind of like how windows CE is completely different from the windows you run on your desktop)
These OSes typically are not custom designed. (although a few in older aircraft are) There are a few commercial rtoses that are commonly used, they are specially marketed to the avionics industry as conforming the DO-178B standard. The most common would probably be Integrity-178B sold by Green Hills Software and VxWorks 653 Platform sold by Wind River.
People dont have to work for minimum wage if they dont want to, some people would rather work at those jobs. McDonalds may be a job a high schooler would want, but if someone trying to raise a family is working there then they should really reassess what they are doing. You can walk in off the street and get a job as a garbage collector and make substantially more than that. You can get a job assembling cars at Toyota with no skills other than a willingness to show up on time, two people working there for a few years is six figures worth of annual income. There are help wanted ads at the place I work for janitors, they cant find any and they are paying more than double if not triple minimum wage.
This idea that people live below the poverty line because they have no other options is just not true in America today. People work low income jobs because choose not to work full time every day. That is fine if they are single with no kids. But for someone who is raising kids to work a job that doesnt pay very much and complain that the rest of society should pick up the bill is silly in my view. Even for people who have been truly unfortunate there are programs to help get them back on their feet.
This isnt the 19th century, anyone can make a living wage if they want it. There are opportunities available for any able bodied american citizen who is willing to show up and do work.
The reason costs arent going down is because we dont have enough free market forces in play. Insurance companies paying for non-catastrophic things has driven costs for relatively simple and routine things way way up. If we eliminated or discouraged that and forced consumers to price shop we would see costs being driven down. There is a problem with health care for sure, but the answer is more free markets, not less.
Yes, but that very small set of good low level items will be priced in such a manner that people who are leveling up a character without a gift of a few hundred gold from a higher level will be unable to afford it.
Thats such a silly comparison. You might as well come along and say that one pound buys you 50 pennies so therefore the US has a better economy by a factor of 50. Noone ever intended for currencies to trade at an exact parity. (ie one euro == one dollar == one yen)
Drugs would be a lot cheaper if there was real price competition. Catastrophic insurance is a lot cheaper than you realize. Typically on the order of less than a hundred dollars a month.