That, good sir, is because the bar is held so lowbecause it'll probably by cell phone manufacturers, and Microsoft.
My (future) business strategy: 1) Identify a target market, based on saturation, existing competition, and expected unhappiness with current user base. 2) Innovate a good product, one that works the way it is expected to work, and handles a lot of stuff automagically. 3) Market your product, and advertise its strengths. 4) Profit!
That is why Apple can get away with (a) higher prices, (b) vendor lock-in, (c) their partnership with AT&T, (d) no SDK (mostly due to 2), and (e) DRM on some stuff.
Chances are, if you hate the product, its probably not being marketed to you. The marketing is a major part, and I think a lot of nerds (such as myself) tend to ignore it. Normal people will ignore marketing, simply because they think it's a fashion accessory; they will only ever use 10% of the features of the thing has, and even if its overpriced, because it works for what they want it to do.
Notice that Microsoft cannot exist if they do not have their monopoly, simply because they are not "hip", nice, or innovative. Apple is hip, and at least innovative, if not nice to non-Apple people. I think the main difference between Microsoft and Apple is that Microsoft sees non-Microsoft users as enemies, while Apple sees non-Apple users as possible converts.
As for the cell phone industry - where was my bluetooth headset included for free? Where was my free texting and free (small) data plans? Where was my (acceptable/approved) third-party applications? Where were my free non-trial games? Where was Youtube on my cellphone? Where were my interchangeable Sim cards? The phone industries wanted to keep the cell phone exactly that - a phone - whereas Apple wanted to bridge between a crappy cell phone and laptop or mobile-internet-device-or-whatever. Apple had the vision, and Apple should reap the benefits.
I am not a fanboy or a business major, and the only Apple product I have is an old iPod. I haven't even put Linux on it, probably because I don't have an iPhone for backup...yet.
Just to let a few people know, this is a joke, and should not be taken to mean that i am implying anything wrong with Microsoft or IE in any way. As previously stated, to do so would be to declare myself a terrorist, which I am not. That being said, please delay the "flamebait" mod feelings for just a bit:
To answer your question: A stinking, steaming pile of shitty code?
I for one wonder if they will try to take on a major law school, like Harvard, or Yale, or something, with this act instead of directly talking to the school.
Something tells me no, as the students will simply run for congress, and change the law.
Furthermore, I think I speak for most of us when I say, "Fuck the RIAA and MPAA." Saying it makes me feel better. Now if I could only cure this movie addiction.
You are assuming that the current legal situation is not run by a pack of over-sensitive, sue-happy sharks who want nothing but money regardless of the methods they use to get it and how many innocent people they hurt.
I probably wasn't clear. Firefox memory leaks do suck, I wasn't debating that. I was talking about the fact that somebody in the community had caught the bug.;-)
I think I'm going to let second sentence just fail all on its own.
Re:It's open once published
on
RTF Vs. OOXML
·
· Score: 0
So, tell me, did you know what MS was going to do *before* Office 2007 came out? I mean specifics, not "they said they would open up their upgrade to.doc, which is called OOXML", I mean, could you have implemented OOXML *before* they came out with it?
I thought not.
And that, lady and gentlemen/. readers, is why it is not an open standard. It is a standard that will have Microsoft's competitors following Microsoft every step of the way for another ten years, anticompetitive measures completely evident.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why Microsoft is afraid of Wine/Crossover Office, Mono, ODF, and other open things - because if somebody can do something just as good (or better, always better to aim high anyways) then Office is no longer a *must have* app in comparison to other offerings (proprietary, FOSS or a mixture thereof), then the main draw of Windows is rendered impotent. If you kill binary formats/OOXML, you kill Office. If you kill Office, you kill Windows. If you kill Windows, you kill Microsoft.
Same applies to Samba, although with the recent news, this is now changing.
How are the politicians supposed to rig the results then? Who do you think is making the decisions to use Diebold in the first place? Politicians pretty much count on Americans being...stupid, which proved correct in Florida. This isn't any different; how many lay (read: non-technical-don't-read-slashdot) people know, or care, about how exactly they vote?
Oh yeah? So how did quantum physics come about? You call that "making sense"?;-)
But, yeah, as a physics undergrad, the Wikibooks come in very handy when the text book you *paid* for ends up not being able to describe some of the basic principles. Everything Feynman had a hand in producing also explains things extremely well.
Phone: Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing. Collect call from marketing department.
Ballmer: What? You mean that we can't embrace them because we can't design an OS to run on their hardware!? Well then, think of the children! The hardware requirements are too low, they won't be able to do anything! Think of the children!
Ballmer waits a bit longer....
Ballmer: What!? What's lynax? A smaller operating system...then they won't be able to do anything! What? It can open Word Documents? Quick - get the lawyers on this - they had to have hacked us to get that.
Waits.
Ballmer: What? We can't run our operating system even close to theirs? How do they expect us to do better? We hold all of their IP! They can't do anything.
Marketing guy responds.
Ballmer: What are you talking about, we have no base to belong to anybody! How the hell are we supposed to extinguish them?
Seems kind of odd that Linux developers have now outdone Microsoft. Microsoft can really embrace them...because Microsoft is asking to be embraced by them. Microsoft can't extend on their idea, because OLPC has done their homework. And their feeble attempt to extinguish OLPC is laughable at best.
My friends, I believe we are seeing the beginning of the end for Microsoft. Good night and good riddance.
While their are many good tools available for doing just that, the problem that Microsoft has is that by using those tools, they are admitting that other people can *gasp* code well (and is therefore an enemy). This has the potential for Microsoft to stumble across somebody's great script, with the owner unwilling to sellout *cough* I mean join forces with Microsoft to develop an all-encompassing solution that everybody can enjoy. Microsoft is afraid of this solution (normal people just call it GNU/Linux) because it means that they will not buy another computer with Windows pre-installed.
And OMFG, I just tried to make a joke, but it turned out to be true and unfunny. I should probably stop drinking and go to bed.
The author is making a joke/funny. The ECMA is being jack#$$*$ and releasing 662 PDFs from a password-protected webpage on a slow server, so it is difficult to get to the complaints and responses about OOXML. The author is being sarcastic when he says "there would have been 662 OOXML files if they had wanted to make it hard for people to read and criticize the responses" because, the current process makes it hard for people to read and criticize the responses. The joke lies in the fact that the ECMA could have released the document as 662 OOXML documents, making it nigh impossible for anybody to read them (unless they had MS Office 2007, or OpenOffice with the OOXML reader).
At least this is what I understood it to be. What do I know?
A free OS (albeit not pre-installed by any OEM save Dell and HP) is not currently crushing a clearly more expensive and worse operating system makes it obvious to me that the more expensive and worse operating system relies on something other than merit to compete. There are really only two ways to ethically compete: rely on marketing (Comcast ads to give a probably terrible example), or to have a better product. Or one can simply spout a few speeches about how everybody is trampling your IP and throw a few chairs to scare everybody into using your product, which is a bastardization of marketing (IMHO). Pre-installation was the killer in the 80/90's, and now that Linux and OS X are starting to gain market share, Microsoft is having to resort to less-than-clearly-ethical practices.
But then I think everybody here knew that alre.(*&#$LOST CARRIER
How much money is spent in black ops? How much money is "wasted" by the government?
Probably about that much.;-)
I think the terrorists have already won, because the whole point of terrorism is...terror, and there are very few *thinking* people who are not afraid of the Patriot Act. The way I see it, the number of people killed in these attacks is miniscule to the number of people affected, but it seems to me that the best/only thing we can do is keep being the land of the free, and try not to provoke other countries (looking at Iraq/Iran).
My 2c/pointless ramblings. Take them with a mound of salt.
Slashdot Mirror
That, good sir, is because the bar is held so lowbecause it'll probably by cell phone manufacturers, and Microsoft.
My (future) business strategy:
1) Identify a target market, based on saturation, existing competition, and expected unhappiness with current user base.
2) Innovate a good product, one that works the way it is expected to work, and handles a lot of stuff automagically.
3) Market your product, and advertise its strengths.
4) Profit!
That is why Apple can get away with (a) higher prices, (b) vendor lock-in, (c) their partnership with AT&T, (d) no SDK (mostly due to 2), and (e) DRM on some stuff.
Chances are, if you hate the product, its probably not being marketed to you. The marketing is a major part, and I think a lot of nerds (such as myself) tend to ignore it. Normal people will ignore marketing, simply because they think it's a fashion accessory; they will only ever use 10% of the features of the thing has, and even if its overpriced, because it works for what they want it to do.
Notice that Microsoft cannot exist if they do not have their monopoly, simply because they are not "hip", nice, or innovative. Apple is hip, and at least innovative, if not nice to non-Apple people. I think the main difference between Microsoft and Apple is that Microsoft sees non-Microsoft users as enemies, while Apple sees non-Apple users as possible converts.
As for the cell phone industry - where was my bluetooth headset included for free? Where was my free texting and free (small) data plans? Where was my (acceptable/approved) third-party applications? Where were my free non-trial games? Where was Youtube on my cellphone? Where were my interchangeable Sim cards? The phone industries wanted to keep the cell phone exactly that - a phone - whereas Apple wanted to bridge between a crappy cell phone and laptop or mobile-internet-device-or-whatever. Apple had the vision, and Apple should reap the benefits.
I am not a fanboy or a business major, and the only Apple product I have is an old iPod. I haven't even put Linux on it, probably because I don't have an iPhone for backup...yet.
We just have to look in a box we are not supposed to look into.
http://khaversiddiqi.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/futurama_ep69.jpg
Any Futurama fans out there?
Just to let a few people know, this is a joke, and should not be taken to mean that i am implying anything wrong with Microsoft or IE in any way. As previously stated, to do so would be to declare myself a terrorist, which I am not. That being said, please delay the "flamebait" mod feelings for just a bit:
To answer your question:
A stinking, steaming pile of shitty code?
now with N times more vulnerability per physical machine!
...and real brine shrimp (sorry, I couldn't resist)!
I for one wonder if they will try to take on a major law school, like Harvard, or Yale, or something, with this act instead of directly talking to the school.
Something tells me no, as the students will simply run for congress, and change the law.
Furthermore, I think I speak for most of us when I say, "Fuck the RIAA and MPAA." Saying it makes me feel better. Now if I could only cure this movie addiction.
Amen to that. Minus the accident. Just the whole ready to die part.
Death smiles at every man, the least one can do is smile back."
Or something like that.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Peltier: "Peltier is currently incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania."
Good try though.
You are assuming that the current legal situation is not run by a pack of over-sensitive, sue-happy sharks who want nothing but money regardless of the methods they use to get it and how many innocent people they hurt.
You assume too much.
I probably wasn't clear. Firefox memory leaks do suck, I wasn't debating that. I was talking about the fact that somebody in the community had caught the bug. ;-)
I think I'm going to let second sentence just fail all on its own.
So, tell me, did you know what MS was going to do *before* Office 2007 came out? I mean specifics, not "they said they would open up their upgrade to .doc, which is called OOXML", I mean, could you have implemented OOXML *before* they came out with it?
/. readers, is why it is not an open standard. It is a standard that will have Microsoft's competitors following Microsoft every step of the way for another ten years, anticompetitive measures completely evident.
I thought not.
And that, lady and gentlemen
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why Microsoft is afraid of Wine/Crossover Office, Mono, ODF, and other open things - because if somebody can do something just as good (or better, always better to aim high anyways) then Office is no longer a *must have* app in comparison to other offerings (proprietary, FOSS or a mixture thereof), then the main draw of Windows is rendered impotent. If you kill binary formats/OOXML, you kill Office. If you kill Office, you kill Windows. If you kill Windows, you kill Microsoft.
Same applies to Samba, although with the recent news, this is now changing.
Killing OOXML today, tomorrow, the WORLD!
lol, captcha: martyr
"If Microsoft gets their butts in gear and start listening to their customers..."
So, you mean, never?
How are the politicians supposed to rig the results then? Who do you think is making the decisions to use Diebold in the first place? Politicians pretty much count on Americans being...stupid, which proved correct in Florida. This isn't any different; how many lay (read: non-technical-don't-read-slashdot) people know, or care, about how exactly they vote?
Fucking pigs...the politicians, I mean.
You forgot:
Step 3: Profit!
lol, captcha: recast
Oh yeah? So how did quantum physics come about? You call that "making sense"? ;-)
But, yeah, as a physics undergrad, the Wikibooks come in very handy when the text book you *paid* for ends up not being able to describe some of the basic principles. Everything Feynman had a hand in producing also explains things extremely well.
1. Embrace
2. Extend
3. Extinguish
Phone: Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing. Collect call from marketing department.
Ballmer: What? You mean that we can't embrace them because we can't design an OS to run on their hardware!? Well then, think of the children! The hardware requirements are too low, they won't be able to do anything! Think of the children!
Ballmer waits a bit longer....
Ballmer: What!? What's lynax? A smaller operating system...then they won't be able to do anything! What? It can open Word Documents? Quick - get the lawyers on this - they had to have hacked us to get that.
Waits.
Ballmer: What? We can't run our operating system even close to theirs? How do they expect us to do better? We hold all of their IP! They can't do anything.
Marketing guy responds.
Ballmer: What are you talking about, we have no base to belong to anybody! How the hell are we supposed to extinguish them?
Seems kind of odd that Linux developers have now outdone Microsoft. Microsoft can really embrace them...because Microsoft is asking to be embraced by them. Microsoft can't extend on their idea, because OLPC has done their homework. And their feeble attempt to extinguish OLPC is laughable at best.
My friends, I believe we are seeing the beginning of the end for Microsoft. Good night and good riddance.
I did not read that the way I should have.
While their are many good tools available for doing just that, the problem that Microsoft has is that by using those tools, they are admitting that other people can *gasp* code well (and is therefore an enemy). This has the potential for Microsoft to stumble across somebody's great script, with the owner unwilling to sellout *cough* I mean join forces with Microsoft to develop an all-encompassing solution that everybody can enjoy. Microsoft is afraid of this solution (normal people just call it GNU/Linux) because it means that they will not buy another computer with Windows pre-installed.
And OMFG, I just tried to make a joke, but it turned out to be true and unfunny. I should probably stop drinking and go to bed.
*Ducks chairs as I head for bed in 3...2...1....*
Whoosh.
The author is making a joke/funny. The ECMA is being jack#$$*$ and releasing 662 PDFs from a password-protected webpage on a slow server, so it is difficult to get to the complaints and responses about OOXML. The author is being sarcastic when he says "there would have been 662 OOXML files if they had wanted to make it hard for people to read and criticize the responses" because, the current process makes it hard for people to read and criticize the responses. The joke lies in the fact that the ECMA could have released the document as 662 OOXML documents, making it nigh impossible for anybody to read them (unless they had MS Office 2007, or OpenOffice with the OOXML reader).
At least this is what I understood it to be. What do I know?
Don't worry bro, it's late here too.
Amen to that.
[/irony]
Perhaps they could nudge other companies into nixing support for the BSA?
Just my thought.
The way I see it:
A free OS (albeit not pre-installed by any OEM save Dell and HP) is not currently crushing a clearly more expensive and worse operating system makes it obvious to me that the more expensive and worse operating system relies on something other than merit to compete. There are really only two ways to ethically compete: rely on marketing (Comcast ads to give a probably terrible example), or to have a better product. Or one can simply spout a few speeches about how everybody is trampling your IP and throw a few chairs to scare everybody into using your product, which is a bastardization of marketing (IMHO). Pre-installation was the killer in the 80/90's, and now that Linux and OS X are starting to gain market share, Microsoft is having to resort to less-than-clearly-ethical practices.
But then I think everybody here knew that alre.(*&#$LOST CARRIER
How much money is spent in black ops? How much money is "wasted" by the government?
;-)
Probably about that much.
I think the terrorists have already won, because the whole point of terrorism is...terror, and there are very few *thinking* people who are not afraid of the Patriot Act. The way I see it, the number of people killed in these attacks is miniscule to the number of people affected, but it seems to me that the best/only thing we can do is keep being the land of the free, and try not to provoke other countries (looking at Iraq/Iran).
My 2c/pointless ramblings. Take them with a mound of salt.
"Lopez, bring up the vehicle"
"Shotgun"
"Shotgun...fuck"