MS is only after those who are buying PCs in volumes, and than installing Windows on them from ONE single licensed/unlicensed CD (typically coming from MSDN subscription.)
I don't see anything wrong in MS taking this action, other than that, IANAL, if it has the legal power to enforce it, but yes it does have the marketing power to force it.
Wait a minute. A large number of/. readers are complaining about MS C++? Why should we care if it is good or bad or if it is out of date or not? We are Linux users are we not or am I hearing that the majority of us are using MS C++ which means you must be developing for M$. Please tell me this is not the case. Ok.:-) ---------------
Sig
abbr.
I've yet to hear a really lucid explanation of why I should want my apps and personal data floating in an amorphous cloud, but maybe that's just me.
XML and its family of technologies such as SOAP, SXLT, et. al. is all about making two "alien thing" to talk to each other at the data level WITHOUT putting any restriction on those two "alien things" (other than that they have to understanding XML.)
Yes, this is being pitched as web-services -- by the market. This is fine as long as you don't stop your thinking at this level, as XML is much more than enabling web-services. For example, there is nothing prevents us from using XML to enable two applications (or components) to communicate to each other even when they are sitting on our local hard-drive.
Now, think about this. If ALL programs and applications had an XML based API (SOAP-RPC) image how simple it would be to integrate and capitalize on them with your own application.
Hell, I can create a brand new application buy accessing the 100+ much often repeated functionality and code in my Linux applications. Now THIS is what I call Open Source (and code reuse) -- a system that I can re-use over and over WITHOUT having to do an open heart-surgery on it.
Of course, distributed hackers have been doing this for years on open source projects.
Please let us not compare XP's success to Open Source success. Anyone who has been in Open Source for a while will tell you that one of the top reasons why Open Source is successful is for the fact that virtually ALL Open Source projects are re-engineering projects based on existing projects.
Linux was not a new *idea* -- it was based on a pre-implemented *idea* -- the same is true for virtually all successful Open Source projects (yes, MS's "innovation" falls into this category too -- in case if you have not yet figured out why they are successful.)
There is a link on the net point this out in full details. I don't know where it is. Maybe a/. reader knows and would share it with us.
I am not trying to be a troll, but it is important to set the facts straight.
"He was too stupid to be a Fed. Hell I don't care if he is, he can't track me."
What?! If he can't "track" him how was he able to contact him with the request in the first place?!!!
Such reports by notable journalist coming from a well known source, MSNBC.com, does nothing but scares the hell out of your average computer users. MSNBC.com would have done a better *service* to its readers if it educated them about how to *NOT* become victims.
Over the years, MS has been labeled in many ways -- the one that keeps coming back over and over again is "The Evil Empire".
My question is two folds:
1) what, if anything, must MS do (or is it already doing so) that would show to the world that it is not an "Evil Empire" and
2) how is it going to do so (assuming it will) and yet see that its bottom-line is meet.
No, I am not interested in a PR campaign -- doing so is a short term solution.
"Tons of us will race out and buy a Charlie Pride..."
"Tons of us"?! Even if EVERY/. and computer geek on the planet went out and buy the Cd for the sake of figuring out how to break the CD, it will only be a mere of 1 or 2% of the CD buying population. Will that register as any sales? I think not.
Simply because we are in a room full of geeks doesn't mean that the world is also all geeks.
Well, if he didn't take the time away from his busy schedule to address a few of the concerns for the Slashdot community, than I don't know *why* he is a representative.
People, please. This is his/there job, he/they *have* to do this otherwise what is the point of paying taxes!
Writing is what it is today for one simple important reason: mankind wanted to be able to created archives that will live on for a long time after the writer is dead.
If it was not for writing, mankind would still be an animal today.
Such posting on/. does nothing but provides more ammunition for the 'outside' word to see/. readers and/. in general as being one sided.
I mean, why is such news relevant to/. readers? When was the last time/. ever posted an article about nothing but on earning for other companies, be it positive or negative?
If/. wants to attract serious journalism for the tech. sector and see it that the outside word take it seriously when it talks about open-source and anti-MS posting, than we better stop being one side. But than again, the tag line for/. is "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters." Makes me wander if *my* posting will be taken seriously.
But wait, what business line is Transmeta in? Software or Hardware? Or is this a sign that they are having a hard time with their CPU (hardware) line of business?
I want to know what such a project that takes away valuable resources from the company has to do with their bottom line when it is not aimed directly at their core business line and product.
They better stay focused on their key business line, otherwise they could be history pretty soon.
Nice post, but you are missing the big picture so I have to try on last time but first you must agree that how those two 'alien-things' find each other and connect is not the job of SOAP/XML. This is a different problem that must be solved by some other means for which a lot of way excits.
Now let me try again... and see if joubin realy understands SOAP and its buseinss value.
Lets say I came up with a new device imbedded in my watch and this device wants a simple service from a server (lets say the weather for NY city or any other city from my limited selections). Lets say there is a server that provides such a service but this server provides an SDK/API based client based on CORBA, Java, etc. So if my limited device wants to get the service out of the server, it must implement the server's SDK/API requirement.
While this is not a problem in a fully fledge environment, it is a serious requirement for my limited device. The only way I can address this problem is create my own server, which acts as a gateway between the real server and my device. A doable solution but unnecessary in the universe of SOAP/XML.
If you think about the problem that I presented and you extend it to other 'services' you will see that SOAP (and XML) is the answer. Lets face, it EDI (if you don't known what that is and it's importance within Fortune 100 companies than you will never understand SOAP or XML) is what used today as the primarily means of exchanging 'smart' data between two or more trading partners that include banks. EDI has a lot of limitations, XML and SOAP will fix all this.
I think you are missing my point and the big picture of SOAP/XML.
Lets say I came up with a new device imbedded in my watch and this device wants a simple service from a server (lets say the weather for NY city or any other city from my limited selections). Lets say there is a server that provides such a service but this server provides an SDK/API based client based on CORBA, Java, etc. So if my limited device wants to get the service out of the server, it must implement the server's SDK/API requirement.
While this is not a problem in a fully fledge environment, it is a serious limitation for my device. The only way I can address it is create my own server, which acts as a gateway between the real server an my device. A doable solution but unnecessary.
If you think about the problem that I presented and you extend it to other 'services' you will see that SOAP (and XML) is the answer. Lets face, it EDI (if you don't known what that is and it's importance within Fortune 100 companies than you will never understand SOAP or XML) is what used today as the primarily means of exchanging 'smart' data between two or more trading partners that include banks. EDI has a lot of limitations, XML and SOAP will fix all this.
Finally, you say SOAP is a M$ implementation. This is not 100% true, if you studied XML and SOAP, you will see that SOAP was XML-RPC. Microsoft did try to tie SOAP to its implementation but it gave up.
If you look deep into SOAP you will see that it is about solving everyday business problems.
Sure it is based on XML markup; sure using CORBA, DCOM, etc. you can enable two object to talk to each other; and so fort. SOAP solves this communication/service problem buy promoting a business-logic instead of a technical-tool. ---------------
Sig
abbr.
Put simply, using SOAP, two or more 'alien-things' can communicate to each other as long as they agree on the SOAP protocol - which is the ONLY requirement when doing client/server using SOAP.
Sure CORBA, DCOM, COM+, Java, etc. allow you to enable two different components to talk to each other, but those technologies do it in such a way that you must have a 'piece' of the server (called the client) to be delivered and used by the client developer. Thus, to talk with a 'server' you must meet the needs of the 'server' when using CORBA, DCOM, COM+, Java, etc.
With SOAP, this is all eliminated. As long as the server publishes its API via the SOAP protocol, I can write my client to talk with the server using what ever I want. This frees me from having to 'embed' in my client a piece of the server -- thus there is no longer any 'hard-coupling' between two 'things'.
In short, using SOAP, we now enable a true 'smart' data-exchange-protocol between two systems such that development is now at the level of "data-exchange" rather than API, SDK, language, etc.
I am not old enough to remember this, but can someone answer this question for me (and by doing so you will reveal your age;-) ). Here is the question
when the tap recorder was interdicted, what was the reaction of the music industry? Did they went up in arms that everyone will now start recording from a tap? Or how about recording from a radio station?
---------------
Sig
abbr.
Re:The virtual machines exist
on
Inside XML
·
· Score: 1
Maybe I was not able to make my point clear. While your link to JVMs is a good one, it only covers devices that exist *today*. What if, there is a new device that want to user the services of a server which requires you to use the server's API/SDK/etc. to communicate with it and yet this new device does not need all of what JVM (or WinCE, or PalmOS, etc) has to offer and this device, must this new device make sure and support JVM? The answer, if you are not using XML, is a definite yes.
With XML, all what the new device will have to support is the XML communication protocol and no more.
As you can see, it's best for me to do things the way I know is best for my device, not the way the server, *believes* it should be. In order for such a solution to work, communication must be based on data-exchange-protocol, not API/SDK/etc. -- i.e.: programming languages.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
What XML is "really" about
on
Inside XML
·
· Score: 2
It saddens me when ever I see people talk about XML as if it is "just a markup language" while this is true, but that is only small part of what XML is "really" about.
Lets face it. When Java was interdicted, its goal was to have Applet running in your home refrigerator, and toaster to name a few -- this was the basic goal of Java. With the arrival of the browsers, this goal was extended to computers so that you can write your program once and it will run on any computer (the "write once run everywhere" slogan.)
While the underlying principle of Java is very powerful, achieving it is so hard. The main reason is due to the fact that you will need a JVM, without which the idea of run "everywhere" is useless.
While for a full fledge PC this is not much of a problem (almost every flavor of an OS out there today has some version of JVM), this is a serious problem for new devices and as well as for companies that want to use Java. Here is why:
1) In order for Java to run on a new device, a JVM must exits for it.
2) In order for an existing application to run in a Java environment (using JVM) the application must be re-written in Java
Sure those issues can be addressed, but doing so you end up by making the new device and the new language "tightly coupled" to Java and JVM. In a client/server environment, this is a limited design such that it means the client part must be bounded to the server part.
XML frees you from this "tight coupling". All that I need to do is publish my Schema using XML and any application written in any language running on any device can now communicate with my application. So if my application provides a service to process patient record and I publish my API to my server-application via a Schema and XML-SOAP, than the client can get my service by simply adhering to my Schema -- the client can be written in any language and running on any device.
In short, XML is all about "data exchange protocol" -- the communication between two XML enabled applications is happening at the data-encoding-level. This is the power of XML where an API or SDK based solution can't solve.
So from now on, stop thinking about XML as "just a markup language" -- XML is a new way for which applications (and soon, components) well start communicating. The future of programming is based on data-communication not API or SDK or a language.
Interesting posts, but it looks like we are missing the point of the article.
The point is not to say that books/papers will disappear, instead it is to say that they will be less common.
Think of it like this. When cars came out, did horses disappear? No, but we still do the same bottom line goal using a different medium.
The same for books/paper. Eventually, they will be replaced with "electronic papers" that rather than having a book made up of 1000 pages and weighting 3 pounds, it will be a lightweight, special type of a computer, than can display pages of text -- in the same quality and even better than what you have today on paper.
There are a lot of advantages for such a medium (as there are for cars over horses). For example, such a medium can now given you animated images on the "electronic paper", can be updated to address errors in the text without having to buy a new edition, and finally, one "electronic book" can now hold, multiple "electronic books". This means, when I go to school, I only have to carry one "electronic book" which contains, my math, biology, etc. books, and most of all it will also contain my "electronic note books" as well.
You are right about what you say about MS. It is a fact that if you ask anyone anywhere what is "Coca-cola", "GE" or "GM and what is "Microsoft" they will not be able to recognize MS.
However, if time is of any indication, than you should see that MS has been around of a little over 20 years while GE, GM, etc. have been around for at least 50 years.
In addition, IBM has been around for over 70 years and believe it or not, they are less influential than MS is.
Yet another example were a company is out of touch and acting like a 10 year old child.
If this ex-company is so worried about what is being said on a public board by an ex-employee, than I think this company has spoken out by its own doing of how poorly they are doing that such a small wind would effect their bottom line.
But than again, not knowing *what* was said on the public board leaves allot in the unsaid.
Interesting answers, but as any grown up knows that such answers could be re-buffed and re-buffed such that the ball can go back and forth in each court for ever.
So here is a question to Sun: when will Sun grow up and just ignore such blunders? By replying to "Chuck's" questions, Sun has lowered its own self-esteem and image to a level that I see Sun as non professional.
I was just trying to be funny as I don't believe the idea of using an asteroid can ever work (I take it as a joke) -- and the fact that those scientists who are proposing it are thinking about issues a billion year from now. Lets get real, there are much more critical things to wary about 1 year from now leave alone a 1000 year or a million.
The whole point of using an asteroid to change the Earth's trajectory, is just pure science-fiction and so is using rockets. Using rockets is not my idea, but years ago when I was a kid and used to watch those Japanese "Godzilla" movies, in one of those movies, they used rocket to move the Earth away from a collusion with an asteroid -- it was sooo funny watching those movies.
So as you can see, this whole thing is a pure joke to me (ridicules if anyone is taking it seriously), and I was trying to be funny. Reading your reply, you sounded like taking my rocket offer seriously. Or were you not?
As for the bridge, don't wary, I can find other customers.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
MS is only after those who are buying PCs in volumes, and than installing Windows on them from ONE single licensed/unlicensed CD (typically coming from MSDN subscription.)
I don't see anything wrong in MS taking this action, other than that, IANAL, if it has the legal power to enforce it, but yes it does have the marketing power to force it.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
Wait a minute. A large number of /. readers are complaining about MS C++? Why should we care if it is good or bad or if it is out of date or not? We are Linux users are we not or am I hearing that the majority of us are using MS C++ which means you must be developing for M$. Please tell me this is not the case. Ok. :-)
---------------
Sig
abbr.
I've yet to hear a really lucid explanation of why I should want my apps and personal data floating in an amorphous cloud, but maybe that's just me.
XML and its family of technologies such as SOAP, SXLT, et. al. is all about making two "alien thing" to talk to each other at the data level WITHOUT putting any restriction on those two "alien things" (other than that they have to understanding XML.)
Yes, this is being pitched as web-services -- by the market. This is fine as long as you don't stop your thinking at this level, as XML is much more than enabling web-services. For example, there is nothing prevents us from using XML to enable two applications (or components) to communicate to each other even when they are sitting on our local hard-drive.
Now, think about this. If ALL programs and applications had an XML based API (SOAP-RPC) image how simple it would be to integrate and capitalize on them with your own application.
Hell, I can create a brand new application buy accessing the 100+ much often repeated functionality and code in my Linux applications. Now THIS is what I call Open Source (and code reuse) -- a system that I can re-use over and over WITHOUT having to do an open heart-surgery on it.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
Of course, distributed hackers have been doing this for years on open source projects.
/. reader knows and would share it with us.
Please let us not compare XP's success to Open Source success. Anyone who has been in Open Source for a while will tell you that one of the top reasons why Open Source is successful is for the fact that virtually ALL Open Source projects are re-engineering projects based on existing projects.
Linux was not a new *idea* -- it was based on a pre-implemented *idea* -- the same is true for virtually all successful Open Source projects (yes, MS's "innovation" falls into this category too -- in case if you have not yet figured out why they are successful.)
There is a link on the net point this out in full details. I don't know where it is. Maybe a
I am not trying to be a troll, but it is important to set the facts straight.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
"He was too stupid to be a Fed. Hell I don't care if he is, he can't track me."
What?! If he can't "track" him how was he able to contact him with the request in the first place?!!!
Such reports by notable journalist coming from a well known source, MSNBC.com, does nothing but scares the hell out of your average computer users. MSNBC.com would have done a better *service* to its readers if it educated them about how to *NOT* become victims.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
Over the years, MS has been labeled in many ways -- the one that keeps coming back over and over again is "The Evil Empire".
My question is two folds:
1) what, if anything, must MS do (or is it already doing so) that would show to the world that it is not an "Evil Empire" and
2) how is it going to do so (assuming it will) and yet see that its bottom-line is meet.
No, I am not interested in a PR campaign -- doing so is a short term solution.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
"Tons of us will race out and buy a Charlie Pride..."
/. and computer geek on the planet went out and buy the Cd for the sake of figuring out how to break the CD, it will only be a mere of 1 or 2% of the CD buying population. Will that register as any sales? I think not.
"Tons of us"?! Even if EVERY
Simply because we are in a room full of geeks doesn't mean that the world is also all geeks.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
Well, if he didn't take the time away from his busy schedule to address a few of the concerns for the Slashdot community, than I don't know *why* he is a representative.
People, please. This is his/there job, he/they *have* to do this otherwise what is the point of paying taxes!
---------------
Sig
abbr.
Writing is what it is today for one simple important reason: mankind wanted to be able to created archives that will live on for a long time after the writer is dead.
If it was not for writing, mankind would still be an animal today.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
Such posting on /. does nothing but provides more ammunition for the 'outside' word to see /. readers and /. in general as being one sided.
/. readers? When was the last time /. ever posted an article about nothing but on earning for other companies, be it positive or negative?
/. wants to attract serious journalism for the tech. sector and see it that the outside word take it seriously when it talks about open-source and anti-MS posting, than we better stop being one side. But than again, the tag line for /. is "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters." Makes me wander if *my* posting will be taken seriously.
I mean, why is such news relevant to
If
---------------
Sig
abbr.
"It is an x86 compatible version..."
But wait, what business line is Transmeta in? Software or Hardware? Or is this a sign that they are having a hard time with their CPU (hardware) line of business?
I want to know what such a project that takes away valuable resources from the company has to do with their bottom line when it is not aimed directly at their core business line and product.
They better stay focused on their key business line, otherwise they could be history pretty soon.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
Nice post, but you are missing the big picture so I have to try on last time but first you must agree that how those two 'alien-things' find each other and connect is not the job of SOAP/XML. This is a different problem that must be solved by some other means for which a lot of way excits.
Now let me try again... and see if joubin realy understands SOAP and its buseinss value.
Lets say I came up with a new device imbedded in my watch and this device wants a simple service from a server (lets say the weather for NY city or any other city from my limited selections). Lets say there is a server that provides such a service but this server provides an SDK/API based client based on CORBA, Java, etc. So if my limited device wants to get the service out of the server, it must implement the server's SDK/API requirement.
While this is not a problem in a fully fledge environment, it is a serious requirement for my limited device. The only way I can address this problem is create my own server, which acts as a gateway between the real server and my device. A doable solution but unnecessary in the universe of SOAP/XML.
If you think about the problem that I presented and you extend it to other 'services' you will see that SOAP (and XML) is the answer. Lets face, it EDI (if you don't known what that is and it's importance within Fortune 100 companies than you will never understand SOAP or XML) is what used today as the primarily means of exchanging 'smart' data between two or more trading partners that include banks. EDI has a lot of limitations, XML and SOAP will fix all this.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
I think you are missing my point and the big picture of SOAP/XML.
Lets say I came up with a new device imbedded in my watch and this device wants a simple service from a server (lets say the weather for NY city or any other city from my limited selections). Lets say there is a server that provides such a service but this server provides an SDK/API based client based on CORBA, Java, etc. So if my limited device wants to get the service out of the server, it must implement the server's SDK/API requirement.
While this is not a problem in a fully fledge environment, it is a serious limitation for my device. The only way I can address it is create my own server, which acts as a gateway between the real server an my device. A doable solution but unnecessary.
If you think about the problem that I presented and you extend it to other 'services' you will see that SOAP (and XML) is the answer. Lets face, it EDI (if you don't known what that is and it's importance within Fortune 100 companies than you will never understand SOAP or XML) is what used today as the primarily means of exchanging 'smart' data between two or more trading partners that include banks. EDI has a lot of limitations, XML and SOAP will fix all this.
Finally, you say SOAP is a M$ implementation. This is not 100% true, if you studied XML and SOAP, you will see that SOAP was XML-RPC. Microsoft did try to tie SOAP to its implementation but it gave up.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
If you look deep into SOAP you will see that it is about solving everyday business problems.
Sure it is based on XML markup; sure using CORBA, DCOM, etc. you can enable two object to talk to each other; and so fort. SOAP solves this communication/service problem buy promoting a business-logic instead of a technical-tool.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
Put simply, using SOAP, two or more 'alien-things' can communicate to each other as long as they agree on the SOAP protocol - which is the ONLY requirement when doing client/server using SOAP.
Sure CORBA, DCOM, COM+, Java, etc. allow you to enable two different components to talk to each other, but those technologies do it in such a way that you must have a 'piece' of the server (called the client) to be delivered and used by the client developer. Thus, to talk with a 'server' you must meet the needs of the 'server' when using CORBA, DCOM, COM+, Java, etc.
With SOAP, this is all eliminated. As long as the server publishes its API via the SOAP protocol, I can write my client to talk with the server using what ever I want. This frees me from having to 'embed' in my client a piece of the server -- thus there is no longer any 'hard-coupling' between two 'things'.
In short, using SOAP, we now enable a true 'smart' data-exchange-protocol between two systems such that development is now at the level of "data-exchange" rather than API, SDK, language, etc.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
Windows can withstand ANYTHING -- so 'rebooting the world' would not be possible.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
I am not old enough to remember this, but can someone answer this question for me (and by doing so you will reveal your age ;-) ). Here is the question
when the tap recorder was interdicted, what was the reaction of the music industry? Did they went up in arms that everyone will now start recording from a tap? Or how about recording from a radio station?
---------------
Sig
abbr.
Maybe I was not able to make my point clear. While your link to JVMs is a good one, it only covers devices that exist *today*. What if, there is a new device that want to user the services of a server which requires you to use the server's API/SDK/etc. to communicate with it and yet this new device does not need all of what JVM (or WinCE, or PalmOS, etc) has to offer and this device, must this new device make sure and support JVM? The answer, if you are not using XML, is a definite yes.
With XML, all what the new device will have to support is the XML communication protocol and no more.
As you can see, it's best for me to do things the way I know is best for my device, not the way the server, *believes* it should be. In order for such a solution to work, communication must be based on data-exchange-protocol, not API/SDK/etc. -- i.e.: programming languages.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
It saddens me when ever I see people talk about XML as if it is "just a markup language" while this is true, but that is only small part of what XML is "really" about.
Lets face it. When Java was interdicted, its goal was to have Applet running in your home refrigerator, and toaster to name a few -- this was the basic goal of Java. With the arrival of the browsers, this goal was extended to computers so that you can write your program once and it will run on any computer (the "write once run everywhere" slogan.)
While the underlying principle of Java is very powerful, achieving it is so hard. The main reason is due to the fact that you will need a JVM, without which the idea of run "everywhere" is useless.
While for a full fledge PC this is not much of a problem (almost every flavor of an OS out there today has some version of JVM), this is a serious problem for new devices and as well as for companies that want to use Java. Here is why:
1) In order for Java to run on a new device, a JVM must exits for it.
2) In order for an existing application to run in a Java environment (using JVM) the application must be re-written in Java
Sure those issues can be addressed, but doing so you end up by making the new device and the new language "tightly coupled" to Java and JVM. In a client/server environment, this is a limited design such that it means the client part must be bounded to the server part.
XML frees you from this "tight coupling". All that I need to do is publish my Schema using XML and any application written in any language running on any device can now communicate with my application. So if my application provides a service to process patient record and I publish my API to my server-application via a Schema and XML-SOAP, than the client can get my service by simply adhering to my Schema -- the client can be written in any language and running on any device.
In short, XML is all about "data exchange protocol" -- the communication between two XML enabled applications is happening at the data-encoding-level. This is the power of XML where an API or SDK based solution can't solve.
So from now on, stop thinking about XML as "just a markup language" -- XML is a new way for which applications (and soon, components) well start communicating. The future of programming is based on data-communication not API or SDK or a language.
-- George
---------------
Sig
abbr.
Interesting posts, but it looks like we are missing the point of the article.
The point is not to say that books/papers will disappear, instead it is to say that they will be less common.
Think of it like this. When cars came out, did horses disappear? No, but we still do the same bottom line goal using a different medium.
The same for books/paper. Eventually, they will be replaced with "electronic papers" that rather than having a book made up of 1000 pages and weighting 3 pounds, it will be a lightweight, special type of a computer, than can display pages of text -- in the same quality and even better than what you have today on paper.
There are a lot of advantages for such a medium (as there are for cars over horses). For example, such a medium can now given you animated images on the "electronic paper", can be updated to address errors in the text without having to buy a new edition, and finally, one "electronic book" can now hold, multiple "electronic books". This means, when I go to school, I only have to carry one "electronic book" which contains, my math, biology, etc. books, and most of all it will also contain my "electronic note books" as well.
Now this would be a realy cool book to have.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
You are right about what you say about MS. It is a fact that if you ask anyone anywhere what is "Coca-cola", "GE" or "GM and what is "Microsoft" they will not be able to recognize MS.
However, if time is of any indication, than you should see that MS has been around of a little over 20 years while GE, GM, etc. have been around for at least 50 years.
In addition, IBM has been around for over 70 years and believe it or not, they are less influential than MS is.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
Yet another example were a company is out of touch and acting like a 10 year old child.
If this ex-company is so worried about what is being said on a public board by an ex-employee, than I think this company has spoken out by its own doing of how poorly they are doing that such a small wind would effect their bottom line.
But than again, not knowing *what* was said on the public board leaves allot in the unsaid.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
Interesting answers, but as any grown up knows that such answers could be re-buffed and re-buffed such that the ball can go back and forth in each court for ever.
So here is a question to Sun: when will Sun grow up and just ignore such blunders? By replying to "Chuck's" questions, Sun has lowered its own self-esteem and image to a level that I see Sun as non professional.
---------------
Sig
abbr.
I was just trying to be funny as I don't believe the idea of using an asteroid can ever work (I take it as a joke) -- and the fact that those scientists who are proposing it are thinking about issues a billion year from now. Lets get real, there are much more critical things to wary about 1 year from now leave alone a 1000 year or a million.
:-)
The whole point of using an asteroid to change the Earth's trajectory, is just pure science-fiction and so is using rockets. Using rockets is not my idea, but years ago when I was a kid and used to watch those Japanese "Godzilla" movies, in one of those movies, they used rocket to move the Earth away from a collusion with an asteroid -- it was sooo funny watching those movies.
So as you can see, this whole thing is a pure joke to me (ridicules if anyone is taking it seriously), and I was trying to be funny. Reading your reply, you sounded like taking my rocket offer seriously. Or were you not?
As for the bridge, don't wary, I can find other customers.
Duh, this tells me that you have taken the asteroid idea/proposal seriously. Wow! I have a bridge for sell, are you interested?