I was just tossing out an example and theorizing on what may be motivating Plextor. I never said I thought it was a GOOD reason. I just think it's a LIKELY reason for the email.
However, my original point remains. If no Open Source code is written to take advantage of the advanced features, then Plextor doesn't have to worry about anyone uncovering, possibly in an inadvertently destructive manner, any such bonehead design decisions on their part.
The problem is, they DO charge extra for the software, so any competition is a threat to their revenue stream.
If someone writes free software to do something they charge $50 for, and it gets ported to Windows, then it can cost them money. Having a lawyer threaten a small time developer is far less expensive than losing a portion of their revenue stream, if all goes well for them.
There's also the fact that if this software exists for Linux, then there will be no ROI on porting their high cost tools to Linux. An entire market segment would be lost to them.
This is all about the BHBs protecting an existing revenue stream (The Windows software they sell) and a prospective revenue stream (A Linux version if they ever decide they want one).
I know, I know, selling hardware to Linux uses is a good thing, because it's sales you wouldn't get otherwise, but I don't think the PHBs see it that way. A Linux user is someone who will NEVER buy their additional software packages. They're a sale that can't be milked for extra sales, and therefore is a less desirable sale.
Truth be told, they'd probably prefer the Linux community ignore them unless they toss "Linux" into their marketing copy.
Plextor may be doing a couple things. First and foremost, they're making sure no unauthorized Open Source projects spring up. They have no interest in supporting the software unless they wrote it. I can understand this motivation. We all remember the Mandrake Linux release that killed some CD RW drives, and Plextor is no doubt concerned about a similar problem for them.
Next, they probably have some lawyers trolling the net, sending cease and desists to anyone writing "competing" software. This is a sadly common CYA issue, and is done more to demonstrate they've been actively protecting their patents and copyrights than anything else. If this is the case, a few e-mails between the developer and Plextor could resolve the problem and allow the software to continue being developed, assuming Plextor doesn't want the product squashed.
Then again, this could all be about unauthorized use of the Plextor name or graphics on the developer's web site. They could be doing this to protect their corporate branding, and to keep people from thinking the software is authorized or supported by Plextor.
Livejournal.com has had a number of problems with Google, and often just plain outright bans them from spidering the site. Part of the problem is that all the registered users have their journals at journalname.livejournal.com as well as livejournal.com\users\journalname. This means indexing the journals for resisted users doubles the load on their server farm!
With something like this, livejournal would be able to define exactly how often the indexing process occurs, and could control which version f the URL is indexes.
I assume issues like this are far from unique.
This is a win-win. Google doesn't have to have it;s spiders crawl sites as often, server load on the various sites is reduced, and indexing frequency is in line with how often the webmaster wants the site to be indexed.
And licensing means that hopefully, the same XML file will be end up being good for multiple search engines!
Very cool technology. Hopefully it's also highly abuse proof. I'd hate to see the results of something like this being used by the "Search engine optimization" firms.
See, first you ball all of the security patches together, and have them all download, even if the user already has them. That way, because it takes longer and is bigger, they think it's a more substantial application.
Second, you add some new features. Like stealing compression code from Stacker, MS will just steal one of the "Tabbed browsing in IE" Plugins and muck the variable names up a bit.
Finally, you tweak the theme. You gotta make it LOOK like a new browser. This is more important than anything else. If it LOOKS the same, people will assume it IS the same. This is why the OS has gotten so much eye candy with each release, it's to make sure the users KNOW they're on a new OS by it LOOKING cooler.
But fixing actual bugs? There's no real Return on Investment on that, so it won't be done.
Of course it would create some positive aspects to having the flue. She's be throwing up all the time, but every so often while bent over the porcelain thrown...
It might have done so, but then they were closing about a dozen auctions a day, so I doubt ebay was all that concerned. Besides, this was during It's first or second year of operation. People got away with a lot back then.
It's good for us that Microsoft told us about this hot new up and coming technology, so we would know better than to waste time on implementing anything with the soon-to-be-dead PDF format.
No one will use PDF for anything after the new MS hotness comes out!
I thought, "what do multiple orgasms have to do with DNA research?"
Oh that's easy.
Every woman will have not one G-spot but four, one of which will be at the back of the throat.
Every man will have a unit built from horse DNA.
And don't forget, everyone will be multi orgasmic!
Reinforced back muscles to support the standard DD chest. (That's the small model)
And of course, everyone will have a FANTASTIC rump.
And then King George W Bush will get wind of this and have everyone's DNA rewritten to be more moral. All pleasure will be taken out of sex, women will be programmed to be subservient to their husbands and submission to authority will be enhanced to the point where average citizens will shoot themselves in the head if anyone in uniform asks them to do so.
And the Conservative Christian utopia will come to be.
You are of course assuming business people use considerations beyond "Is this what I'm familiar with?" and "Will this be compatible with my customers?"
They don't.
The things we consider important are not factors to most businesses, even though making them a factor would be better for the business in the long run.
Long term outlooks like the one you're discussing are dead in America. You're lucky to get a manager who looks beyond the next quarter, let alone beyond the next major software upgrade cycle!
I know what you mean. The first time I used ebay was to buy a WinCE clamshell device. I also wanted to get the memory chip to upgrade it's install of Wince to 2.0 (It shipped with 1.0)
So I found an auction on ebay. Several as a matter of fact, all from the same company. The chips were selling for $90 to $125 a pop. I was a bit put off by this price, and decided to click the "Buy this item direct from our web site" link in the middle of the ebay ad.
This link was in large type, easily five times the size of the surrounding text, red and blinking. Kinda hard to miss.
They were selling it for $25 from their web site.
I can i\only image the laugh they were getting form the ebay auctions. They were doing everything reasonable to make it easy for people to get the lowest price they had to offer, and yet people were paying five times that because they couldn't be bothered to click a link in the middle of the damn ad.
If they are hoping for patents to help them out, people will work around it by using patent-free zones. I forsee a company in India setting up a web based service doing MS XML to OASIS document conversion.
Well, that will be great for India, but anyone who tries to sell that software in the US will be SOL.
Remember original Halloween document? Remember the part about using patents and litigation to kill Open Source?
FUD isn't working, so they're gearing up to toss this to the legal team. Soon, it will be a DMCA violation to have your Office Suite read Microsoft formats.
You can't let these Open Source junkies get in the way of REAL productivity. Their "Something for nothing" mentality is absurd. You get what you pay for, and something that's free clearly isn't good enough to justify charging money.
And considering some of the crap the charge money for, that's saying something.
Microsoft all the way baby. Microsoft all the way.
MS suddenly supporting PDF export like in OOo or StarOffice
Shhhh. It's coming in a few months.
And remember, Microsoft was the first to do it. Anyone else who claims to be doing it added the feature after Microsoft did, and their version isn't as good.
You can get a virus from exporting to PDF using OpenOffice
Microsoft innovated the concept. Microsoft was the first to market with such a revolutionary data storage technique.
On the fly compression of documents was Microsoft's idea.
Microsoft innovated. Microsoft developed the Graphical User Interface. Apple stole it, and did it poorly. They can't even figure out a use for the second mouse button!
Microsoft and it's developers are always first. No one else is ever first.
Windows Media Player was the first to support MP3 ripping.
And when IE 7 comes out, it will be the first to introduce a revolutionary new feature, Tabbed Browsing!
Commit no thought crime. Remember, if it's good and has to do with computers, Microsoft innovated it.
and all you'll have to do is license the 20 or so patents that protect these formats, and you'll be able to make a competing product that can read Excel files.
Nope. The NDA will forbid making a competing product.
Slashdot Mirror
I was just tossing out an example and theorizing on what may be motivating Plextor. I never said I thought it was a GOOD reason. I just think it's a LIKELY reason for the email.
Good point. Thank you for the clarification.
However, my original point remains. If no Open Source code is written to take advantage of the advanced features, then Plextor doesn't have to worry about anyone uncovering, possibly in an inadvertently destructive manner, any such bonehead design decisions on their part.
The problem is, they DO charge extra for the software, so any competition is a threat to their revenue stream.
If someone writes free software to do something they charge $50 for, and it gets ported to Windows, then it can cost them money. Having a lawyer threaten a small time developer is far less expensive than losing a portion of their revenue stream, if all goes well for them.
There's also the fact that if this software exists for Linux, then there will be no ROI on porting their high cost tools to Linux. An entire market segment would be lost to them.
This is all about the BHBs protecting an existing revenue stream (The Windows software they sell) and a prospective revenue stream (A Linux version if they ever decide they want one).
I know, I know, selling hardware to Linux uses is a good thing, because it's sales you wouldn't get otherwise, but I don't think the PHBs see it that way. A Linux user is someone who will NEVER buy their additional software packages. They're a sale that can't be milked for extra sales, and therefore is a less desirable sale.
Truth be told, they'd probably prefer the Linux community ignore them unless they toss "Linux" into their marketing copy.
I built my motherborad out of GINGERBREAD!
And the computer itself out of wheat bread.
Top that
Plextor may be doing a couple things. First and foremost, they're making sure no unauthorized Open Source projects spring up. They have no interest in supporting the software unless they wrote it. I can understand this motivation. We all remember the Mandrake Linux release that killed some CD RW drives, and Plextor is no doubt concerned about a similar problem for them.
Next, they probably have some lawyers trolling the net, sending cease and desists to anyone writing "competing" software. This is a sadly common CYA issue, and is done more to demonstrate they've been actively protecting their patents and copyrights than anything else. If this is the case, a few e-mails between the developer and Plextor could resolve the problem and allow the software to continue being developed, assuming Plextor doesn't want the product squashed.
Then again, this could all be about unauthorized use of the Plextor name or graphics on the developer's web site. They could be doing this to protect their corporate branding, and to keep people from thinking the software is authorized or supported by Plextor.
Has anyone contacted Plextor about this?
Last I heard they had blocked ALL Google indexing. robots.txt is somewhat restrictive.
This sounds like a really cool idea.
Livejournal.com has had a number of problems with Google, and often just plain outright bans them from spidering the site. Part of the problem is that all the registered users have their journals at journalname.livejournal.com as well as livejournal.com\users\journalname. This means indexing the journals for resisted users doubles the load on their server farm!
With something like this, livejournal would be able to define exactly how often the indexing process occurs, and could control which version f the URL is indexes.
I assume issues like this are far from unique.
This is a win-win. Google doesn't have to have it;s spiders crawl sites as often, server load on the various sites is reduced, and indexing frequency is in line with how often the webmaster wants the site to be indexed.
And licensing means that hopefully, the same XML file will be end up being good for multiple search engines!
Very cool technology. Hopefully it's also highly abuse proof. I'd hate to see the results of something like this being used by the "Search engine optimization" firms.
shed our fear of losing money
Clearly, you're not in the U. S. A.
That's not an American attitude AT ALL!
It's all about features.
See, first you ball all of the security patches together, and have them all download, even if the user already has them. That way, because it takes longer and is bigger, they think it's a more substantial application.
Second, you add some new features. Like stealing compression code from Stacker, MS will just steal one of the "Tabbed browsing in IE" Plugins and muck the variable names up a bit.
Finally, you tweak the theme. You gotta make it LOOK like a new browser. This is more important than anything else. If it LOOKS the same, people will assume it IS the same. This is why the OS has gotten so much eye candy with each release, it's to make sure the users KNOW they're on a new OS by it LOOKING cooler.
But fixing actual bugs? There's no real Return on Investment on that, so it won't be done.
I tend to consider eating disorders a down side.
Of course it would create some positive aspects to having the flue. She's be throwing up all the time, but every so often while bent over the porcelain thrown...
Wait a second, I thought information wanted to be free?
Is it good or bad that these guys were caught?
* smirk *
It might have done so, but then they were closing about a dozen auctions a day, so I doubt ebay was all that concerned. Besides, this was during It's first or second year of operation. People got away with a lot back then.
Of course the down side of this would be eating and even throwing up could induce orgasm. Bulimia would skyrocket.
Yeah.
It's good for us that Microsoft told us about this hot new up and coming technology, so we would know better than to waste time on implementing anything with the soon-to-be-dead PDF format.
No one will use PDF for anything after the new MS hotness comes out!
I thought, "what do multiple orgasms have to do with DNA research?"
Oh that's easy.
Every woman will have not one G-spot but four, one of which will be at the back of the throat.
Every man will have a unit built from horse DNA.
And don't forget, everyone will be multi orgasmic!
Reinforced back muscles to support the standard DD chest. (That's the small model)
And of course, everyone will have a FANTASTIC rump.
And then King George W Bush will get wind of this and have everyone's DNA rewritten to be more moral. All pleasure will be taken out of sex, women will be programmed to be subservient to their husbands and submission to authority will be enhanced to the point where average citizens will shoot themselves in the head if anyone in uniform asks them to do so.
And the Conservative Christian utopia will come to be.
You are of course assuming business people use considerations beyond "Is this what I'm familiar with?" and "Will this be compatible with my customers?"
They don't.
The things we consider important are not factors to most businesses, even though making them a factor would be better for the business in the long run.
Long term outlooks like the one you're discussing are dead in America. You're lucky to get a manager who looks beyond the next quarter, let alone beyond the next major software upgrade cycle!
I know what you mean. The first time I used ebay was to buy a WinCE clamshell device. I also wanted to get the memory chip to upgrade it's install of Wince to 2.0 (It shipped with 1.0)
So I found an auction on ebay. Several as a matter of fact, all from the same company. The chips were selling for $90 to $125 a pop. I was a bit put off by this price, and decided to click the "Buy this item direct from our web site" link in the middle of the ebay ad.
This link was in large type, easily five times the size of the surrounding text, red and blinking. Kinda hard to miss.
They were selling it for $25 from their web site.
I can i\only image the laugh they were getting form the ebay auctions. They were doing everything reasonable to make it easy for people to get the lowest price they had to offer, and yet people were paying five times that because they couldn't be bothered to click a link in the middle of the damn ad.
Office 2003 XML Reference Schema Patent License
Just TRY to use the Office XML Specification in an Open Source application. Go ahead, I dare you.
If they are hoping for patents to help them out, people will work around it by using patent-free zones. I forsee a company in India setting up a web based service doing MS XML to OASIS document conversion.
Well, that will be great for India, but anyone who tries to sell that software in the US will be SOL.
Remember original Halloween document? Remember the part about using patents and litigation to kill Open Source?
FUD isn't working, so they're gearing up to toss this to the legal team. Soon, it will be a DMCA violation to have your Office Suite read Microsoft formats.
Good man.
You can't let these Open Source junkies get in the way of REAL productivity. Their "Something for nothing" mentality is absurd. You get what you pay for, and something that's free clearly isn't good enough to justify charging money.
And considering some of the crap the charge money for, that's saying something.
Microsoft all the way baby. Microsoft all the way.
MS suddenly supporting PDF export like in OOo or StarOffice
Shhhh. It's coming in a few months.
And remember, Microsoft was the first to do it. Anyone else who claims to be doing it added the feature after Microsoft did, and their version isn't as good.
You can get a virus from exporting to PDF using OpenOffice
Silence!!!
Microsoft innovated the concept. Microsoft was the first to market with such a revolutionary data storage technique.
On the fly compression of documents was Microsoft's idea.
Microsoft innovated. Microsoft developed the Graphical User Interface. Apple stole it, and did it poorly. They can't even figure out a use for the second mouse button!
Microsoft and it's developers are always first. No one else is ever first.
Windows Media Player was the first to support MP3 ripping.
And when IE 7 comes out, it will be the first to introduce a revolutionary new feature, Tabbed Browsing!
Commit no thought crime. Remember, if it's good and has to do with computers, Microsoft innovated it.
Or what Publisher did to EPS
Oh, your first born, you'll never work on or with an Open Source product again, will use only MS licensed languages, the standard stuff.
and all you'll have to do is license the 20 or so patents that protect these formats, and you'll be able to make a competing product that can read Excel files.
Nope. The NDA will forbid making a competing product.