Most countries of this world seem to have strong governments, but, lack the necessary transitional mechansims to pass the baton from one generation to the next. Or they may have the mechanism, but, it is typically violent.
Russia, Greece, Iraq, Pakistan, and Iran come to mind as examples of this problem.
I believe that the condition in Iran is an example of older generations failing to pass the baton to the next generation. The riots in Greece earlier this year had basically the same overriding foundation but a different trigger (in Iran it was the election, in Greece it was a police shooting).
Governments must respect generational transitions and allowing younger generations increasing responsibility in their lives and in their countries.
Otherwise, revolts, riots, and revolution will occur.
Statistics should never be a part of human life when it comes to wellness.
Human nature always focuses on "hunches" while business nature focuses on "statistical economic optimization" (i.e. make the most money).
American healthcare is the latter while European has the former.
My wife had a cough for months and most of the time was relegated to the couch and the bed. We went on a trip to Europe to get away and decided to go to a doctor while there. In a matter of minutes, she was properly diagnosed and within a couple of weeks was cleared of her issue.
The only cost was 40 euros for the doctor's time and he gave us some drugs to hold us over until we came back for free.
This was a case of using a hunch instead of statistics. A good doctor knows when to move away from statistics and into hunches.
Great article. Now that I know this, I'll be glad to outsource your job.
Thanks for making it easy for me!!
Sincerely,
Your Boss
Don't Use a Lawer to fix a business problem!
on
Microsoft's New Hurdles
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Never use a lawyer to fix an economic condition. Throughout history, whenever a particular company has a commanding lead in a particular market, its gross profit margin is very high.
Examples of former companies with high gross profit margins in their industries: IBM (computing), Rockefeller oil company (oil industry), US Steel (steel).
Why is this the case? Because hardly anyone knew anything about the business of that industry at the time because it was tied to a new technology. The oil and steel were tightly attached to the automobile, train, electrical appliances, and electrical machine industries.
In each of these cases, it took the consumer and technological investments from other companies to overtake these companies and make them just another company in the industry.
Forget what the government does--it matters what you do and how you (the person or the manager) spend your money that determines the outcome of Microsoft and any other monopoly. Research your decisions properly and make a wise business investment based on 1) your company's goals, 2) your division's goals, and 3) your ideas about the technology industry and how it can be used as a tool.
I truely believe that if people simply research the many different ways to solve a problem using technology that Microsoft would be by now simply one of many software companies out there.
1. Company A makes software product B whose total cost of development/test/marketing, etc. is approximately $XX,000,000.
2. Company A sells X,000,000 million copies of software B in its introductory year--making it's marginal cost of "development/test/marketing" $10.
3. Company A sells software product B for $200, making it's profit margin for this product $180.
By the time 1 or 2 million copies of software product B is purchased, Company A has paid off its initial cost and further revenue is pure profit.
You name an industry that has this type of profit margin and I'll call it the software industry--no one other industry has this luxury--actually burglary may have a better profit margin if you never get caught.
This is why software costs too much!
Oh, by the way... Company A is Microsoft, Software product B is Windows 3.1/95/98/ME/NT/2K (you pick the OS). XX is anything from 1-99 and X is anything from 1-9, the other numbers stay the same.
The next time you pay more than $1 for a piece of software, consider yourself "flim-flammed"!!
Your use of the Word "It" is trademark by me. You are in violation. Expect a letter from my lawyer in a few days....
Thank you
P.S.
You see, if you used the word "it", I couldn't sue you. My ex-brother in law (you know the one that lives in a van by the river) could because he has the trademark on that word.
"I can't really say if anything has changed over the years..."
"I'm not sure much will change..."
"We clearly accept that customers will choose multiple operating systems depending on how they need to solve their business problems"
"Today, there is an almost violent dislike for anything Microsoft in the Linux community"
"I personally think that we will see a mixed model for the foreseeable future"
"...I don't see a major revolution here"
"In the end, it all comes down to solving customers' problems "
These answers to questions are about as vague as saying, "It depends on what the word "is" is...".
Please, nothing came out of this interview that surprised or even raised any eyebrows. Yes, Microsoft makes money and doesn't like it when an equivalent product out there competes with it but doesn't use the profit model as the reason for its existence. So what, we've all known that for years.
LINUX and Microsoft represent two distinct and fundamental splits in the IT world. One world, the Open Source world, considers software to be a commodity--an advanced engine whose purpose is to lower the cost to the "consumer" to almost zero. To Microsoft, software is a very valuable piece of a corporation. Because of its cost-saving capabilities, it should charge a premium for its product.
Microsoft charges for its OS--LINUX distros allow themselves to be used for free.
Microsoft uses proprietary protocols to perform many of their tasks--LINUX doesn't.
The real question is--which fundamental split is the way to go with in the future. No answers have been given...
Let's make one thing clear when it comes to jobs. We have a job so that we can pay for things to live and maybe enough to actually enhanced our lives.
I would never choose a job that did not fit that purpose.
Don't be a Geek Greek--become a Greek Geek. Learn the Greek language, study the Greek culture...
Become a Greek Geek!!
(This is a public service announcement)
Suits will never "not-be-needed". They've always been the interface to the customer. If an OSS project's objective is to write code that non-programmers will use, then eventually a suit will be needed. Problem today is that many of the suits do not have a good idea as to interface between the customer and the technology. The technology is too new and dynamic to be able to pinpoint a good way of doing this. What OSS does though is accept that fact and focus on the technology. Let the people (not the market) decide what they want on their computers. As a result, you have many OSS projects getting into state-of-the-art stuff before Microsoft et al. Just my two cents...
Finally someone who knows what he's talking about. Why should people learn an OS. Just like what was said in another post: an OS is just a tool.
The only thing people should do is the stuff they need to do: send a message to another person or group, coordinate a meeting, do research. Why should they do things like "point and click", "File->SaveAs...", or type on the keyboard.
The OS is still in its infancy. For developers, though, it will continue to be what it is today--just cooler--and that's where LINUX comes in.
I think what's going on in LINUX today will be in competing OS's tomorrow.
Slashdot Mirror
apparently the Supreme Court thinks like the NFL...(http:///www.aereo.com)
Most countries of this world seem to have strong governments, but, lack the necessary transitional mechansims to pass the baton from one generation to the next. Or they may have the mechanism, but, it is typically violent.
Russia, Greece, Iraq, Pakistan, and Iran come to mind as examples of this problem.
I believe that the condition in Iran is an example of older generations failing to pass the baton to the next generation. The riots in Greece earlier this year had basically the same overriding foundation but a different trigger (in Iran it was the election, in Greece it was a police shooting).
Governments must respect generational transitions and allowing younger generations increasing responsibility in their lives and in their countries.
Otherwise, revolts, riots, and revolution will occur.
Just my two cents...
Statistics should never be a part of human life when it comes to wellness.
Human nature always focuses on "hunches" while business nature focuses on "statistical economic optimization" (i.e. make the most money).
American healthcare is the latter while European has the former.
My wife had a cough for months and most of the time was relegated to the couch and the bed. We went on a trip to Europe to get away and decided to go to a doctor while there. In a matter of minutes, she was properly diagnosed and within a couple of weeks was cleared of her issue.
The only cost was 40 euros for the doctor's time and he gave us some drugs to hold us over until we came back for free.
This was a case of using a hunch instead of statistics. A good doctor knows when to move away from statistics and into hunches.
This is what US doctors should be trained to do.
Great article. Now that I know this, I'll be glad to outsource your job.
Thanks for making it easy for me!!
Sincerely,
Your Boss
Never use a lawyer to fix an economic condition. Throughout history, whenever a particular company has a commanding lead in a particular market, its gross profit margin is very high.
Examples of former companies with high gross profit margins in their industries: IBM (computing), Rockefeller oil company (oil industry), US Steel (steel).
Why is this the case? Because hardly anyone knew anything about the business of that industry at the time because it was tied to a new technology. The oil and steel were tightly attached to the automobile, train, electrical appliances, and electrical machine industries.
In each of these cases, it took the consumer and technological investments from other companies to overtake these companies and make them just another company in the industry.
Forget what the government does--it matters what you do and how you (the person or the manager) spend your money that determines the outcome of Microsoft and any other monopoly. Research your decisions properly and make a wise business investment based on 1) your company's goals, 2) your division's goals, and 3) your ideas about the technology industry and how it can be used as a tool.
I truely believe that if people simply research the many different ways to solve a problem using technology that Microsoft would be by now simply one of many software companies out there.
Why Does Software Cost So Much?
1. Company A makes software product B whose total cost of development/test/marketing, etc. is approximately $XX,000,000.
2. Company A sells X,000,000 million copies of software B in its introductory year--making it's marginal cost of "development/test/marketing" $10.
3. Company A sells software product B for $200, making it's profit margin for this product $180.
By the time 1 or 2 million copies of software product B is purchased, Company A has paid off its initial cost and further revenue is pure profit.
You name an industry that has this type of profit margin and I'll call it the software industry--no one other industry has this luxury--actually burglary may have a better profit margin if you never get caught.
This is why software costs too much!
Oh, by the way... Company A is Microsoft, Software product B is Windows 3.1/95/98/ME/NT/2K (you pick the OS). XX is anything from 1-99 and X is anything from 1-9, the other numbers stay the same.
The next time you pay more than $1 for a piece of software, consider yourself "flim-flammed"!!
Your use of the Word "It" is trademark by me. You are in violation. Expect a letter from my lawyer in a few days....
Thank you
P.S.
You see, if you used the word "it", I couldn't sue you. My ex-brother in law (you know the one that lives in a van by the river) could because he has the trademark on that word.
Here are some quotes from this interview:
..."
"I can't really say if anything has changed over the years..."
"I'm not sure much will change
"We clearly accept that customers will choose multiple operating systems depending on how they need to solve their business problems"
"Today, there is an almost violent dislike for anything Microsoft in the Linux community"
"I personally think that we will see a mixed model for the foreseeable future"
"...I don't see a major revolution here"
"In the end, it all comes down to solving customers' problems "
These answers to questions are about as vague as saying, "It depends on what the word "is" is...".
Please, nothing came out of this interview that surprised or even raised any eyebrows. Yes, Microsoft makes money and doesn't like it when an equivalent product out there competes with it but doesn't use the profit model as the reason for its existence. So what, we've all known that for years.
LINUX and Microsoft represent two distinct and fundamental splits in the IT world. One world, the Open Source world, considers software to be a commodity--an advanced engine whose purpose is to lower the cost to the "consumer" to almost zero. To Microsoft, software is a very valuable piece of a corporation. Because of its cost-saving capabilities, it should charge a premium for its product.
Microsoft charges for its OS--LINUX distros allow themselves to be used for free.
Microsoft uses proprietary protocols to perform many of their tasks--LINUX doesn't.
The real question is--which fundamental split is the way to go with in the future. No answers have been given...
Let's make one thing clear when it comes to jobs. We have a job so that we can pay for things to live and maybe enough to actually enhanced our lives. I would never choose a job that did not fit that purpose.
Don't be a Geek Greek--become a Greek Geek. Learn the Greek language, study the Greek culture... Become a Greek Geek!! (This is a public service announcement)
Suits will never "not-be-needed". They've always been the interface to the customer. If an OSS project's objective is to write code that non-programmers will use, then eventually a suit will be needed.
Problem today is that many of the suits do not have a good idea as to interface between the customer and the technology. The technology is too new and dynamic to be able to pinpoint a good way of doing this. What OSS does though is accept that fact and focus on the technology. Let the people (not the market) decide what they want on their computers. As a result, you have many OSS projects getting into state-of-the-art stuff before Microsoft et al. Just my two cents...
Finally someone who knows what he's talking about. Why should people learn an OS. Just like what was said in another post: an OS is just a tool.
The only thing people should do is the stuff they need to do: send a message to another person or group, coordinate a meeting, do research. Why should they do things like "point and click", "File->SaveAs...", or type on the keyboard.
The OS is still in its infancy. For developers, though, it will continue to be what it is today--just cooler--and that's where LINUX comes in.
I think what's going on in LINUX today will be in competing OS's tomorrow.