Linux is a kernel. It is up to the X.org people and window managers to worry about the desktop. However, I can't see Linux on the desktop being very important. There isn't any reason why Windows can't be on the desktop. Let Linux do what it was designed to do and use a tool that is better for the job do the job. In that case, Windows is that tool. Conversely, let Linux/*BSD/Solaris/Other related be on the server and not Windows.
Yes, that is why I said they wouldn't completely eliminate R&D. They would still innovate, but it would be focused on lowering the price. However, I can't see a company being willing to add features to their product when the competition is just going to copy it because there is no protection of IP.
The subject I chose isn't really correct. I agree with you, this will hurt business and customers too (in the long run). That's why I wrote about the lack of innovation. This is a pure price war without the factors of mercantilism (that is, factors such as being first to innovate don't affect price).
No, you don't understand. In the absence of intellectual property protection (as in China), you will see innovation and development flourish, since it will be perfectly legal for other firms to do that thing which is most valuable to innovation: copying. And even though there is no value in doing so, people will continue to innovate for some reason. The engineers should charge for performances or sell T-shirts with their designs on them.
Could you elaborate on "for some reason?" Why should a company invest in developing something new to differentiate their product if they won't be protected? The competition will just copy it and sell it at a lower price because they didn't have to invest as much in R&D (beyond copying). It doesn't make sense for a company to do this.
I realize that, that is why I put Capitalism in quotes. It isn't the same as the Western world because of lack of respect of intellectual property. It really isn't good for business or customers. The customers will enjoy low prices, but in the long term, they will suffer the lack of innovation due to companies like Samsung downsizing their R&D departments. I guess my post's subject contradicts the actual post.
I'm not saying it is good for the business. It is very bad for the business. The customers, however, will enjoy the short term benefit of low prices. The customers will also likely suffer fewer innovations because companies like Samsung don't want to waste money coming up with new features that will just get copied.
The manufacturers of the "genuine" products will need to compete based on price. It seems that being the first isn't a factor in the Chinese market. The only worry is that companies like Samsung could downsize their R&D departments to better compete on price, which would result in fewer innovations for everyone.
I live in an area outside of the city. Until recently, the only available ISPs were long distance Dial-Up ISPs. The local Telco has been hesitant to provide new services to customers. They have refused to repair their lines that are so noisy that Dial-UP connections get dropped. They rolled out ADSL service recently, but the service is unreliable and you can't download anything faster than 12 KB/second. This makes downloading a Linux distribution take a very long tie and require frequent use of wget'c -c parameter. They claim that Verizon's outages are to blame for their frequent down times. Adelphia (now Time Warner) began offering service here. Their service is much faster, however, the service can have downtimes that last several days. When I ask for an ETA on the repair, they often tell me that they don't know when they will be able to get someone out to start working on the problems. Reliability doesn't seem to be very high on these companies' list of priorities.
For the majority of users, iTunes is a non issue. They simply want an intuitive way to download and rip music. They want a short learning curve. iTunes gives them this. A USB drive type of player will appeal to some of us that want flexibility over a short learning curve, but will ultimately remain in its small niche.
I agree that Internet Explorer 7 is definitely competition for Firefox. However, I think the IE team shot themselves in the foot when they moved the menu bar. I went back to Firefox because I liked the user interface better.
Slashdot Mirror
Linux is a kernel. It is up to the X.org people and window managers to worry about the desktop. However, I can't see Linux on the desktop being very important. There isn't any reason why Windows can't be on the desktop. Let Linux do what it was designed to do and use a tool that is better for the job do the job. In that case, Windows is that tool. Conversely, let Linux/*BSD/Solaris/Other related be on the server and not Windows.
Yes, that is why I said they wouldn't completely eliminate R&D. They would still innovate, but it would be focused on lowering the price. However, I can't see a company being willing to add features to their product when the competition is just going to copy it because there is no protection of IP.
The subject I chose isn't really correct. I agree with you, this will hurt business and customers too (in the long run). That's why I wrote about the lack of innovation. This is a pure price war without the factors of mercantilism (that is, factors such as being first to innovate don't affect price).
I realize that, that is why I put Capitalism in quotes. It isn't the same as the Western world because of lack of respect of intellectual property. It really isn't good for business or customers. The customers will enjoy low prices, but in the long term, they will suffer the lack of innovation due to companies like Samsung downsizing their R&D departments. I guess my post's subject contradicts the actual post.
I'm not saying it is good for the business. It is very bad for the business. The customers, however, will enjoy the short term benefit of low prices. The customers will also likely suffer fewer innovations because companies like Samsung don't want to waste money coming up with new features that will just get copied.
The manufacturers of the "genuine" products will need to compete based on price. It seems that being the first isn't a factor in the Chinese market. The only worry is that companies like Samsung could downsize their R&D departments to better compete on price, which would result in fewer innovations for everyone.
I live in an area outside of the city. Until recently, the only available ISPs were long distance Dial-Up ISPs. The local Telco has been hesitant to provide new services to customers. They have refused to repair their lines that are so noisy that Dial-UP connections get dropped. They rolled out ADSL service recently, but the service is unreliable and you can't download anything faster than 12 KB/second. This makes downloading a Linux distribution take a very long tie and require frequent use of wget'c -c parameter. They claim that Verizon's outages are to blame for their frequent down times. Adelphia (now Time Warner) began offering service here. Their service is much faster, however, the service can have downtimes that last several days. When I ask for an ETA on the repair, they often tell me that they don't know when they will be able to get someone out to start working on the problems. Reliability doesn't seem to be very high on these companies' list of priorities.
For the majority of users, iTunes is a non issue. They simply want an intuitive way to download and rip music. They want a short learning curve. iTunes gives them this. A USB drive type of player will appeal to some of us that want flexibility over a short learning curve, but will ultimately remain in its small niche.
I agree that Internet Explorer 7 is definitely competition for Firefox. However, I think the IE team shot themselves in the foot when they moved the menu bar. I went back to Firefox because I liked the user interface better.