... or a media feedback loop occurred in the middle of a slow news cycle. Given a choice between conspiracy vs. systems doing what systems do, I'll go with systems.
I have heard that what you say is true if and only if you are the exclusive owner of your work. For example, if your publisher has any ownership stake at all (quite likely) then you're basically fucked. Is that bullshit?
There, fixed that for you. The record industry is the one that makes money on recordings. The music industry is the one that makes money on music in general including concerts. The music industry is fine and will be fine. The record industry is fucked.
Sure, as Search consumers you and I are freely able to choose one search engine over another, but are advertisers freely able to choose a competitor's ad platform over Google's? I mean, they could choose to not get eyeballs on ads, but that's not what they're in business to do.
Google said "Trust us, investors: We're going to continue giving away Search for free and figure out how to monetize it later. But trust us, you'll get rich!"
... and they were right! This gave Google a lot of credibility when they said "Trust us, investors: We're going to continue giving away YouTube for free and figure out how to monetize it later. But trust us, you'll get rich!"
... except they were wrong. YouTube costs Google investors more money than it returns with no signs that dynamic will shift. In fact, it's probably getting worse over time: Google loses money on every YouTube visit; increasing market share or total visits just makes the investor loses worse.
So Google must do something to turn YouTube profitable or their credibility with investors to "Give away free for now and monetize later" will be shot.
They should be open for anybody to use. There should be no licensing costs associated with implementing the document readers, and the specs should be freely (as in beer) obtainable.
I believe every single one of those requirements is satisfied by MS Office Open XML formats.
Please explain how to implement "autoSpaceLikeWord95" and "lineWrapLikeWord6". Microsoft's proposed 6000 page standard does not define these, along with many other parts of the specification. Even if you can reverse engineer Microsoft's products and determine how to implement those features, Microsoft's covenant not to sue does not "apply to things that are merely referenced in the specification". As you can see MS Office Open XML fails on all three requirements.
Why should a government or its agencies care about legacy format and layout conventions? They can just use the current generation { wrap, space,... } standards and know that they can continue to build and standardize around these going forward. Despite their reputations, I suspect few in government are honestly going for that ever-fashionable "Word6" look in their documents.
They should be open for anybody to use. There should be no licensing costs associated with implementing the document readers, and the specs should be freely (as in beer) obtainable.
I believe every single one of those requirements is satisfied by MS Office Open XML formats.
For the last several years, the single biggest end-user complaint about MS operating systems has been security (or lack thereof). Now they release an operating system with a concerted security focus and the criticism is that MS is no longer focuses on end-users? It seems to me that they've been focused on end-users to a fault.
Slashdot Mirror
... or a media feedback loop occurred in the middle of a slow news cycle. Given a choice between conspiracy vs. systems doing what systems do, I'll go with systems.
I have heard that what you say is true if and only if you are the exclusive owner of your work. For example, if your publisher has any ownership stake at all (quite likely) then you're basically fucked. Is that bullshit?
There, fixed that for you. The record industry is the one that makes money on recordings. The music industry is the one that makes money on music in general including concerts. The music industry is fine and will be fine. The record industry is fucked.
Commoditized space junk. Lovely. And for only $800 I will personally throw a piece of plastic into the North Pacific Gyre on your behalf.
The exact same argument can be made for the BSD base Apple uses for OSX.
So what? They're different cases, so a rational mind takes them one at a time and is free to come to different conclusions for each.
Sure, as Search consumers you and I are freely able to choose one search engine over another, but are advertisers freely able to choose a competitor's ad platform over Google's? I mean, they could choose to not get eyeballs on ads, but that's not what they're in business to do.
Google said "Trust us, investors: We're going to continue giving away Search for free and figure out how to monetize it later. But trust us, you'll get rich!"
... and they were right! This gave Google a lot of credibility when they said "Trust us, investors: We're going to continue giving away YouTube for free and figure out how to monetize it later. But trust us, you'll get rich!"
... except they were wrong. YouTube costs Google investors more money than it returns with no signs that dynamic will shift. In fact, it's probably getting worse over time: Google loses money on every YouTube visit; increasing market share or total visits just makes the investor loses worse.
So Google must do something to turn YouTube profitable or their credibility with investors to "Give away free for now and monetize later" will be shot.
I believe every single one of those requirements is satisfied by MS Office Open XML formats.
For the last several years, the single biggest end-user complaint about MS operating systems has been security (or lack thereof). Now they release an operating system with a concerted security focus and the criticism is that MS is no longer focuses on end-users? It seems to me that they've been focused on end-users to a fault.