I used to buy prebuilt boxes (HP, Dell, Acer) with Win7, and I used them as they are, with Win7 OS. But if I am required to buy Win8 when I need another box I will instead buy parts and build a PC this way - something I haven't done for a long, long time.
Dell or HP would be happy to sell you a Win7 machine:
I was under the impression that binding arbitration requirements could apply only as part of a preexisting contractual relationship between the parties.
The use of a copyrighted work creates a contract. Ta-da.
Except that the countersuit would be based on the claim that there was no use of the copyrighted work, hence no contract, hence no requirement for binding arbitration.
Why is the government protecting a business model that is based on selling equipment at a loss?
Because they're not selling equipment at a loss. They're not even selling equipment - they're selling a bundle of equipment and a service contract. And the price of equipment + contract > the cost of equipment + service. And early termination fees protect their investment.
Streaming services like Rdio, MOG and Rhapsody are poor analogs to broadcast radio, as the listener chooses exactly what they want to hear from a vast library of music. Given the ease with which these services can be streamed through home music systems, as well as the growing connectivity of mobile devices, these services become more of a replacement for a personal collection of music than the advertising service of broadcast radio. Even services like Pandora, which don't give you specific choice, provide individualized programs that are a great deal closer to a library replacement than is/was the single-program of broadcast.
Consumers in ten states (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Oklahoma, Texas) won't be affected, since laws in those states forbid the practice
California law prohibits adding a surcharge for credit cards, but allows a discount for cash: California Civil Code Section 1748.1. So while consumers in California may not be affected by the change in national law, they're already subject to the possibility of a higher price when using a credit card - and unlike states that will now allow surcharging, California receipts do not break out the difference in price as a separate charge.
Even a glimmer of responsibility for fair and balanced use of public airwaves (as in a fairness doctrine) has long since been extinguished. And c|net, being a web-based outlet, isn't using public airwaves.
Cnet is free from government abridgment in this affair; their corporate overlords are not subject to the first amendment's constitutional proscription.
According to Eric Brown, an IBM research assistant...
Eric Brown isn't a research assistant, he's a research scientist. More formally, he's a Research Staff Member, which is IBM's title for its research scientists. He hasn't been a research assistant since grad school.
I suppose the difference comes from why they wanted to print it and make such a big deal about it. All things considered it was another attempt to demonize a segment of the population they don't care for and would like to go away. It wasn't news. It was an attempt at intimidation.
So you'd like to have the government analyze a speaker's intention and then decide whether or not to suppress their speech? And if the government decides the speech is intended to demonize a segment of the population (or simply "wasn't news") - for example, criticizing the efficacy of a particular congressional majority or the policies of a sitting president - then you're comfortable with that speech being suppressed?
It also should not protect your ability to publish whether or not I legally purchased a gun, since that is very likely to result in me being unjustly harassed by anti-gun nuts like you.
Could you draw a line between which publicly available information (such as New York gun registrations) shall be reprintable and which you'd like the government to suppress?
But other than being vigilant about any city rezoning plans, and raising a stink if some developer decides to apply to have it rezoned so they can drop a condo on the lot there's not much one can really do.
You could buy the surrounding land and personally control its fate.
What dollars? Wasn't the original Watchmen a huge financial bust? Along the lines of the studio guys saying they'd never do an R-Rated Comic movie again?
As noted by others, the movie wasn't a blockbuster, but the graphic novel is a perennial that's sold 2 million copies and counting.
The example was only meant to show that Microsoft has a poor commercial track record with their phones. And given that the roadmap was denominated in quarters, the joke couldn't easily be constructed in a finer time frame. Still, the writer's room should take note.
Slashdot Mirror
I used to buy prebuilt boxes (HP, Dell, Acer) with Win7, and I used them as they are, with Win7 OS. But if I am required to buy Win8 when I need another box I will instead buy parts and build a PC this way - something I haven't done for a long, long time.
Dell or HP would be happy to sell you a Win7 machine:
I was under the impression that binding arbitration requirements could apply only as part of a preexisting contractual relationship between the parties.
The use of a copyrighted work creates a contract. Ta-da.
Except that the countersuit would be based on the claim that there was no use of the copyrighted work, hence no contract, hence no requirement for binding arbitration.
Why is the government protecting a business model that is based on selling equipment at a loss?
Because they're not selling equipment at a loss. They're not even selling equipment - they're selling a bundle of equipment and a service contract. And the price of equipment + contract > the cost of equipment + service. And early termination fees protect their investment.
Streaming services like Rdio, MOG and Rhapsody are poor analogs to broadcast radio, as the listener chooses exactly what they want to hear from a vast library of music. Given the ease with which these services can be streamed through home music systems, as well as the growing connectivity of mobile devices, these services become more of a replacement for a personal collection of music than the advertising service of broadcast radio. Even services like Pandora, which don't give you specific choice, provide individualized programs that are a great deal closer to a library replacement than is/was the single-program of broadcast.
Consumers in ten states (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Oklahoma, Texas) won't be affected, since laws in those states forbid the practice
California law prohibits adding a surcharge for credit cards, but allows a discount for cash: California Civil Code Section 1748.1. So while consumers in California may not be affected by the change in national law, they're already subject to the possibility of a higher price when using a credit card - and unlike states that will now allow surcharging, California receipts do not break out the difference in price as a separate charge.
Even a glimmer of responsibility for fair and balanced use of public airwaves (as in a fairness doctrine) has long since been extinguished. And c|net, being a web-based outlet, isn't using public airwaves.
Got to love modern day freedom of the press!
Cnet is free from government abridgment in this affair; their corporate overlords are not subject to the first amendment's constitutional proscription.
According to Eric Brown, an IBM research assistant...
Eric Brown isn't a research assistant, he's a research scientist. More formally, he's a Research Staff Member, which is IBM's title for its research scientists. He hasn't been a research assistant since grad school.
... won't be finding viewers, it will be hanging onto their cable allocations.
I suppose the difference comes from why they wanted to print it and make such a big deal about it. All things considered it was another attempt to demonize a segment of the population they don't care for and would like to go away. It wasn't news. It was an attempt at intimidation.
So you'd like to have the government analyze a speaker's intention and then decide whether or not to suppress their speech? And if the government decides the speech is intended to demonize a segment of the population (or simply "wasn't news") - for example, criticizing the efficacy of a particular congressional majority or the policies of a sitting president - then you're comfortable with that speech being suppressed?
It also should not protect your ability to publish whether or not I legally purchased a gun, since that is very likely to result in me being unjustly harassed by anti-gun nuts like you.
Could you draw a line between which publicly available information (such as New York gun registrations) shall be reprintable and which you'd like the government to suppress?
For the receiver, this test allows them to hear from people who have an important message to send them.
One of the most important messages that a stranger could send me is "ka-ching." That is, let me set my own price and keep the proceeds.
... to find your way from iOS to Android. Goodbye Apple.
We have J.P. Patches Avenue in Fremont, Seattle, after all.
Will-- look in the dryer for your birthday present.
Someone should log the Minneapolis police; somehow I think they'd object.
In the new UI, somebody decided that little tiny dark icons with no text description were cool.
Gear -> Settings -> Button Labels -> Text
Hopefully they didn't put the logout link 5 pixels below the account selector, as did the idiots who revamped Hotmail's UI.
When they ask what kind of car you have, tell them it's a 1928 Porter, and let them give you a quote on an extended warranty.
A good source of ways to handle unsolicited sales calls: Fun with Phone Solicitors: 50 Ways to Get Even.
Jesus fighting the Romans??? ...
No - Jesus fought Lex Luther. Superman fought the Romans.
But other than being vigilant about any city rezoning plans, and raising a stink if some developer decides to apply to have it rezoned so they can drop a condo on the lot there's not much one can really do.
You could buy the surrounding land and personally control its fate.
Ironically, Facebook will exercise the ultimate dislike by banning this app.
I think you could make a point without sending someone to prison for ten years on some vague charge of "bias intimidation."
As vague as this New Jersey statute?
What dollars? Wasn't the original Watchmen a huge financial bust? Along the lines of the studio guys saying they'd never do an R-Rated Comic movie again?
As noted by others, the movie wasn't a blockbuster, but the graphic novel is a perennial that's sold 2 million copies and counting.
April and June are in the same quarter.
The example was only meant to show that Microsoft has a poor commercial track record with their phones. And given that the roadmap was denominated in quarters, the joke couldn't easily be constructed in a finer time frame. Still, the writer's room should take note.