The crux of the issue: Who controls the standards.
Microsoft has yet to comply with any standard I know of. Microsoft instead uses "innovative" (yeah right Bill) alterations to exclude compatability (ie Win2K Kerberos). Microsoft even dragged its feet to get on board with TCP/IP (IMHO). What about the blatant failure to fully implement JAVA so as to promote their own software development. And most importantly, the supposed collaboration between Microsoft and INTEL on the PIII. Ask 3Com what they think of Microsofts "open standards development (ie NDIS). The only way to provide for a level playing ground is to split the Applications from the OS and provide true open application interface standards. The divorce needs to be so complete so that the only way the two can talk is through an OS/Application open standards organization (as yet non-existant) that would include multiple OS platforms and application developers. This could also preclude a future case with AOL.
If there is any item that I've brought up that you don't have a background on then you need to do some serious research to understand the true insideous nature of the OS/Application monopoly.
I have used both *nix and M$ products for several years and I'll take *nix any day. It has taken a while for *nix to get a full featured GUI which has been the main reason that it hasn't been accepted at the desktop level. If you don't think that is changing, than you are wearing blinders. Add WINE, a fully functional implementation of the Win32API that will run hundreds of M$ Windows programs and there is no excuse to put up with Windows. With the exception of OLE, I don't think M$ has done anything original in the last decade. IMHO they have done just the opposite and tried to stiffle innovation. There implementation of JAVA is an atrocity. Word was to compete with Word Perfect, Power Point vs. Harvard Graphics, Excel vs. Lotus 123, Access vs. DBase, etc..... There networking leaves a lot to be desired (although they have been able to catch up in the last couple of years). And what about the most successful unix project, the Internet (neither Bill nor Al Gore created it)? A group of Unix "xealots" working together to achieve a common set of communications protocols. As far as a formal education, I don't have one. I don't need a formal education to know the difference between quality and garbage.
Yes they can, it's called the DMCA. They don't have to come in. They are allowed to close you down without even having to say hello. In fact, if you try to prevent them (ie closing off ports used to validate licenses) you are in violation.
Although I was not one of the directed shares participants, I was not even allowed to participate in the IPO. I took their online questionaire and was notified that I did not meet the requirements. What requirements?
Having been involved with computers for almost 20 years, I can assure you that people will find a use for the bandwidth you provide. How about a full motion video/audio site?
Of course, QOS will become a huge issue. How come my provider only gives me 23 Mb/s and yours gives 35? How come I can't get above 10 during busy hours?
Unfortunately, current trends in asp demonstrate how radically thinking has shifted in only the last 5 years. Instead of client-server apps. We now have server provides client apps. We have come full circle and are moving away from distributed computing. Why? Bandwith.
I beleive the greatest challenge over the next 5 years will mirror telecommunications. Access to local network infrastructure by independent vendors. The old last mile syndrome. Just look at what happened with AT&T in the northwest.
I am still considering constructing a private neighborhood fiber network.
Although I still use Microsoft products, I much prefer Unix. Yes, I am not the average user, however, as the GUI and installation improves, users will migrate (although) slowly toward lower cost (free) software. Mass movement will only come as software vendors move their products over. We see more and more of this happening every day. The rollercoaster has just started going down the first drop!
The question is too short sighted. It's not what, or how much, but when. Limitation of human memory, no problem. We can already get neurons to grow onto semi-conductors. Limited colors, no problem. Retinal implants or complete eye replacements. Bio mechanical-electrical-electronic advancements are a reality. Our digital links grow stronger every single day.
Apparently, looking at the way Microsoft incorporated sysdiff into the NT system, I can understand the reasoning behind this liscensing. Fortunately products like Symantics Ghost exist. I think this caused Microsoft to re-think it's backup/restore/imaging process and now you have the ability in Win2k to create a disk image. Unfortunately the liscense is written with the original philosophy in mind. OEM CD + sysdiff file would restore your PC. I don't however think the liscense reflects the Windows 98 product.
With more and more overt intrusion into the realm of personal privacy, why not address the issue with congress. A simple solution would be to allocate a range of ports (say 50000-59999) that are available for vendors to obtain feedback. Make all other ports require explicit user notification prior to passing on information. Then, if you don't wish to have a vendor obtain information anonymously you can block ports 50000-59999.
Slashdot Mirror
The crux of the issue: Who controls the standards. Microsoft has yet to comply with any standard I know of. Microsoft instead uses "innovative" (yeah right Bill) alterations to exclude compatability (ie Win2K Kerberos). Microsoft even dragged its feet to get on board with TCP/IP (IMHO). What about the blatant failure to fully implement JAVA so as to promote their own software development. And most importantly, the supposed collaboration between Microsoft and INTEL on the PIII. Ask 3Com what they think of Microsofts "open standards development (ie NDIS). The only way to provide for a level playing ground is to split the Applications from the OS and provide true open application interface standards. The divorce needs to be so complete so that the only way the two can talk is through an OS/Application open standards organization (as yet non-existant) that would include multiple OS platforms and application developers. This could also preclude a future case with AOL. If there is any item that I've brought up that you don't have a background on then you need to do some serious research to understand the true insideous nature of the OS/Application monopoly.
I have used both *nix and M$ products for several years and I'll take *nix any day. It has taken a while for *nix to get a full featured GUI which has been the main reason that it hasn't been accepted at the desktop level. If you don't think that is changing, than you are wearing blinders. Add WINE, a fully functional implementation of the Win32API that will run hundreds of M$ Windows programs and there is no excuse to put up with Windows. With the exception of OLE, I don't think M$ has done anything original in the last decade. IMHO they have done just the opposite and tried to stiffle innovation. There implementation of JAVA is an atrocity. Word was to compete with Word Perfect, Power Point vs. Harvard Graphics, Excel vs. Lotus 123, Access vs. DBase, etc..... There networking leaves a lot to be desired (although they have been able to catch up in the last couple of years). And what about the most successful unix project, the Internet (neither Bill nor Al Gore created it)? A group of Unix "xealots" working together to achieve a common set of communications protocols. As far as a formal education, I don't have one. I don't need a formal education to know the difference between quality and garbage.
Yes they can, it's called the DMCA. They don't have to come in. They are allowed to close you down without even having to say hello. In fact, if you try to prevent them (ie closing off ports used to validate licenses) you are in violation.
Although I was not one of the directed shares participants, I was not even allowed to participate in the IPO. I took their online questionaire and was notified that I did not meet the requirements. What requirements?
Having been involved with computers for almost 20 years, I can assure you that people will find a use for the bandwidth you provide. How about a full motion video/audio site? Of course, QOS will become a huge issue. How come my provider only gives me 23 Mb/s and yours gives 35? How come I can't get above 10 during busy hours? Unfortunately, current trends in asp demonstrate how radically thinking has shifted in only the last 5 years. Instead of client-server apps. We now have server provides client apps. We have come full circle and are moving away from distributed computing. Why? Bandwith. I beleive the greatest challenge over the next 5 years will mirror telecommunications. Access to local network infrastructure by independent vendors. The old last mile syndrome. Just look at what happened with AT&T in the northwest. I am still considering constructing a private neighborhood fiber network.
Although I still use Microsoft products, I much prefer Unix. Yes, I am not the average user, however, as the GUI and installation improves, users will migrate (although) slowly toward lower cost (free) software. Mass movement will only come as software vendors move their products over. We see more and more of this happening every day. The rollercoaster has just started going down the first drop!
The question is too short sighted. It's not what, or how much, but when. Limitation of human memory, no problem. We can already get neurons to grow onto semi-conductors. Limited colors, no problem. Retinal implants or complete eye replacements. Bio mechanical-electrical-electronic advancements are a reality. Our digital links grow stronger every single day.
Apparently, looking at the way Microsoft incorporated sysdiff into the NT system, I can understand the reasoning behind this liscensing. Fortunately products like Symantics Ghost exist. I think this caused Microsoft to re-think it's backup/restore/imaging process and now you have the ability in Win2k to create a disk image. Unfortunately the liscense is written with the original philosophy in mind. OEM CD + sysdiff file would restore your PC. I don't however think the liscense reflects the Windows 98 product.
With more and more overt intrusion into the realm of personal privacy, why not address the issue with congress. A simple solution would be to allocate a range of ports (say 50000-59999) that are available for vendors to obtain feedback. Make all other ports require explicit user notification prior to passing on information. Then, if you don't wish to have a vendor obtain information anonymously you can block ports 50000-59999.