If it is any indication, I remember laughing at a judge who presided over a case of copyright infringement. After the trial the judge, and many in the jury, said in an interview they had difficulty understanding terms like website, and browser.
Is to sit down with a math book, and work the problems. The more you do, the better you are. Sorry man. There is no other way. Speaking from experience.
So you can't compete, so you just want them to remove it? you guys are some real dipshits. what the point. everyone would just put windows right back on it.
Microsoft allows you to upgrade and operate as normal fully well knowing you've stolen their software. Apple bricks your phone when you've paid $700 for it.
Oh, well.
Yea, i know i hoped right over to Ubuntu. With so many programs and such a easy to use interface, it was so much better than all the other two-bit wanna be OS'.
Where do you guys come up with this DMCA bull? Don't you know the DMCA has, and always will be, a tool to be used against you? Claim DMCA all you want; they'll laugh in your face.
This is undeniable, unbiased market response. Linux will never be there if they continue to deny what the user demands. The whole concept is flawed. Contrary to fan-boy belief, no one wants a zillion options. Too confusing. The end user pointing out to you the problems. You decide not to fix them. You dig your own grave.
What are you smoking? Do you even know what a monopoly is? Please Google the definition. How can Microsoft be a monopoly when there are several other options you can choose from? the key phrase being "you can choose".
The people have chosen Microsoft Windows. The people are free to choose any other company. The people continue to choose Microsoft Windows. The are industries that make money from producing calculator software. Do they now get to sue? What about text editor software companies? I believe Windows comes with notepad. Is that now an impending lawsuit? All this judgement has shown is the obtuseness of justice officials in separating preconceived notions when adjudicating matter of large business.
The European court system is a complete fraud. This would never have happened in an American court room. These are the same people who allow lawsuits against churches for not allowing gay organizations to use their property. Any other company would not have these nonsensical restrictions placed on them.
A version of Windows without media player? Are they serious? If not media player, then why anything else? Seriously. It doesn't make any sense.
How about suing HP for packaging Intel processors in their computers.
Or maybe sue Motorola for using their own components in cell phones.
Absolutely absurd.
Judgments like these stifle technological growth. Alternative, and sometimes better, solutions do not exist when government legislates "competition". Using your rabbit-hole reasoning Ford was a monopoly. They never were, but lets just use your illogic and say that they were. Look at them now. Just imagine what phone companies would do if they were able to litigate and win in this fashion. None of us would have the speedy fiber optic connections to the internet right from our home. wait a minute...
Companies don't produce new (and better) products just for the hell of it.
Yes you are exactly right. They can determine exactly how you can use their product. You buy it you agree to their terms. You drive on a road, you agree to stay under the speed limit and obey the rules of the road. If not, you are free to walk. If you don't like the fact that you can "context shift" or whatever it is you want to do, guess what doc? you don't have to use it.
I don't know where you guys come up with these arguments, or any of your arguments come to think about it. Once bought, you enter into an agreement on how you agree to use their product. plain and simple. you would be the same way if it was your product; especially if selling the product is how you made a living.
Slashdot Mirror
when the linux users get a real OS like Windows it wont be a problem.
If it is any indication, I remember laughing at a judge who presided over a case of copyright infringement. After the trial the judge, and many in the jury, said in an interview they had difficulty understanding terms like website, and browser.
RIAA will sue itself for providing the music to pirate.
Is to sit down with a math book, and work the problems. The more you do, the better you are. Sorry man. There is no other way. Speaking from experience.
as Jerry Seinfeld put it, "where people go to die?," I doubt they'd be able to understand technology past a paper and pencil anyway.
just in, someone had a fight with Ballmer and the turd-monkeys on slashdot think its news!!!
So you can't compete, so you just want them to remove it? you guys are some real dipshits. what the point. everyone would just put windows right back on it.
Microsoft allows you to upgrade and operate as normal fully well knowing you've stolen their software. Apple bricks your phone when you've paid $700 for it. Oh, well.
Yea, i know i hoped right over to Ubuntu. With so many programs and such a easy to use interface, it was so much better than all the other two-bit wanna be OS'.
MTV may need avail himself of few reading comprehension classes.
When you guys say 'news for nerds' you're not kidding.
Which leaves them with a payout of $530 millions dollars. cash. poor bastards.
yea. ok. apple did it irritate microsoft. no wonder apple is... well, apple.
apple. the gestapo of computing. next time just buy a real phone.
Sir, I second that.
The problem is that no one wants to switch when the old thing is working fine.
Where do you guys come up with this DMCA bull? Don't you know the DMCA has, and always will be, a tool to be used against you? Claim DMCA all you want; they'll laugh in your face.
Agreed Sir. Agreed.
This is undeniable, unbiased market response. Linux will never be there if they continue to deny what the user demands. The whole concept is flawed. Contrary to fan-boy belief, no one wants a zillion options. Too confusing. The end user pointing out to you the problems. You decide not to fix them. You dig your own grave.
Disappear (dissapear)? Perhaps.
Move to a Mac or Linux? Bwahahahaha!
What do you think the chances are that the woman who brought this case even knows what a media player is? shes about 150 years old.
What are you smoking? Do you even know what a monopoly is? Please Google the definition. How can Microsoft be a monopoly when there are several other options you can choose from? the key phrase being "you can choose". The people have chosen Microsoft Windows. The people are free to choose any other company. The people continue to choose Microsoft Windows. The are industries that make money from producing calculator software. Do they now get to sue? What about text editor software companies? I believe Windows comes with notepad. Is that now an impending lawsuit? All this judgement has shown is the obtuseness of justice officials in separating preconceived notions when adjudicating matter of large business. The European court system is a complete fraud. This would never have happened in an American court room. These are the same people who allow lawsuits against churches for not allowing gay organizations to use their property. Any other company would not have these nonsensical restrictions placed on them. A version of Windows without media player? Are they serious? If not media player, then why anything else? Seriously. It doesn't make any sense. How about suing HP for packaging Intel processors in their computers. Or maybe sue Motorola for using their own components in cell phones. Absolutely absurd. Judgments like these stifle technological growth. Alternative, and sometimes better, solutions do not exist when government legislates "competition". Using your rabbit-hole reasoning Ford was a monopoly. They never were, but lets just use your illogic and say that they were. Look at them now. Just imagine what phone companies would do if they were able to litigate and win in this fashion. None of us would have the speedy fiber optic connections to the internet right from our home. wait a minute... Companies don't produce new (and better) products just for the hell of it.
Yes you are exactly right. They can determine exactly how you can use their product. You buy it you agree to their terms. You drive on a road, you agree to stay under the speed limit and obey the rules of the road. If not, you are free to walk. If you don't like the fact that you can "context shift" or whatever it is you want to do, guess what doc? you don't have to use it. I don't know where you guys come up with these arguments, or any of your arguments come to think about it. Once bought, you enter into an agreement on how you agree to use their product. plain and simple. you would be the same way if it was your product; especially if selling the product is how you made a living.
" That's what one who believes in God says. One who doesn't would say what the GP did." Ooooo, now i get it. i get jokes.
this is a lesson from the ultimate hustler. satan himself couldn't have come up with a better scheme. well played mr. jobs, well played...