IBM never "opened" the PC architecture. Clone companies could _not_ license the technology from IBM. IBM failed to protect their designs for the PC, and thought that they could beat anyone else on volume. Compaq successfully (from a legal point of view) reverse-engineered a compatible BIOS, and IBM was toast.
And I'll point you to the numerous investigations of Microsoft's Business Strategy that involved numerous investigations by the Federal Government for unfair and/or illegal business practices that culminated in their conviction in the Anti-trust lawsuit.
Note also that MS were just a little bit innovative in those days. Excel for example was the first spreadsheet for a GUI, and (like VisiCalc had for the Apple-2 before it) was responsible for selling a _lot_ of Macs. Likewise, Word could use bit-mapped displays to do then unheard of things such as (albeit limited) WYSIWYG, and supported a mouse for many operations -- unlike WordPerfect, it was also profoundly multi-platform (MS started out being platform-agnostic!).
Microsoft got the idea for Word (and a lot of assistance on how to write for GUI apps) from MacWrite and Apple. Not particularly innovative.
On the other hand, however, I'm convinced that there are certain products which could be improved dramatically, but which are intentionally designed to fail. For example, light bulbs. Incandescent light bulbs have been around for over 100 years, yet their design is almost completely unchanged. They're good for a few thousand hours, then the filament burns out and you have to buy more. You can't convince me that light bulb manufacturers haven't figured out how to build a light bulb that will never burn out. How hard could it be? Make the filament just a fraction thicker, maybe devise a technique to remove a higher percentage of the oxygen from the bulb... something, anything.
Sometimes, physics gets in your way. It isn't easy to improve the life of an incandescent light bulb without other tradeoffs.
I notice that the light bulb companies are selling a lot of compact fluorescent and quartz-halogen (and soon, LED) light bulbs. Not incandescents. And the new technology bulbs last a lot longer than the old technology. This is a strong argument that they welcome the improvements in service life that the new technology offers, and if they could have gotten the improvements in service life from the older technology without tradeoffs then they would have.
My wife's Toyota Camry is 12 years old and has 280,000 miles on it. She's going to get another Toyota when this one finally gives up the ghost. I've owned a Dodge, a Ford, and now a Mercury. Each car is better than the last, but I am more likely than not to look at a Honda or a Toyota when I can afford a new car. Too many electrical problems. Too many seal problems.
Planned obsolescence makes the consumer look for a replacement sooner. If the consumer didn't like the value of the last buy because of the item's short life, the consumer may look to other suppliers.
Premium goods command a premium price. Being able to show that your offering will last longer than the competitors' means that your products offer a premium value. Now go and market that value to consumers, and be sure that you can recoup any extra costs of providing that durability.
So, Kyoto skeptics, what would be fair limits on CO2 for China and USA?
Presume, for a moment, that KWh/person is proportional to CO2/person. KWh/person probably understates CO2 emission for the USA, and overstates it for China.
I hardly think it fair that both countries reduce their usages by 10%.
We could average the two figures, and make both countries get or stay under that cap. 6,000 KWh/person. How about that? Why not?
Networking PCs was as important, maybe more important, than the notion of the PC itself.
And we all know how Microsoft led in that area. Their BlackBird networkins service totally dominates... errr..., wait. They were caught totally off guard by the rise of the internet, and the importance of TCP/IP. They did wake up to the threat posed to their business by the web browser, but so late that they had to break the law to fight it off, and then have an election go there way to get away with it.
The way "linked" particles work is that if you measure a property (say, spin) of the two particles, the measurements will be the same. The interpretation is that when you make one measurement, some information is transmitted to the other particle so that when it is measured the results will be the same. The "transmission" is said to be instantaneous (in whose reference frame?). The value of the property being a hidden variable is another interpretation.
Anyway, I dimly recall being told that there is a proof that such linked particles cannot be used to transmit a message
Yes, Apple paid Xerox for the rights to commercialize anything they saw on the famous PARC visit. The GUI is the one thing Apple noticed.
Apple put a lot of their own work into the GUI as well. Menus that pull-down from a header were an Apple invention. Apple thought they saw overlapping windows at PARC (but didn't) and then built overlapping windows into LISA and Macintosh.
Bush can't write laws. He can only sign them into law or veto them. Only Congress can write new laws.
That's so 20th Century. You haven't heard about signing statements, have you? Congress passes the law (both houses, reconciliation, etc) and then Bush get's to decide what the law really means with a Signing Statement.
For example, the law may read "Noone in the employ or contracted by any part of the Federal governmeny may torture any person in their custody" with the usual dozen pages of verbiage defining what "custody" and "torture" mean. Then Bush writes "I will interpret the law as if noone means anyone", and signs it.
If that's not writing new laws, I don't know what is.
Your argument goes by the name "Pascal's Wager". This argument leaves off innumerable possibilities. You could end up being punished for not praying to the God who revealed himself to Mohammad. Or you could meet Loki in the afterlife, who is upset with you for not believing. Or....
We only have the one planet. There aren't any others to choose from.
That humankind has increased atmospheric CO2 is not open to doubt. That increased atmospheric CO2 decreases atmospheric transparency to Infra-red radiation is not open to doubt.
Those who claim that Global Climate Change is (a) not caused by human activity and (b) not really happening, generally publish where their work doesn't have to go through peer-review. In other words, they choose venues where they can say what their corporate paymasters want them to say without being contradicted by folks who inisist on facts.
part of the cease fire agreement was that Iraq destroy and document the destruction of the WMD, and that did not happen.
It did happen. Bush Administration folks took a look at the documentation, and said "it's a pack of lies". Turns out the evil dictator was correct, and the Bush Administration folks were lying.
Microsoft found it very convenient to tell WordPerfect that OS/2 was the answer. That they should put all of their efforts into WordPerfect for OS/2. And then Microsoft pulled out Windows 3, and Word for Windows.
China emits greenhouse gasses at around 1/10th the rate, per person, as the USA. Why should the USA continue it's free ride while those who cause far less change are constrained?
Noone claimed that American CO2 is "evil", nor that Chinese CO2 is "good".
One force is to have the same code do the same thing on all platforms, so int = 32 bits and long = 64 bits everywhere. The other force is to have ints be the "most efficient" size on each platform.
I remember the days when int might have been 16 bits. That way madness lies.
I chose to sell my Apple stock in the summer of 2001; part of the down payment on a house. The house has not appreciated much. The Apple stock went up by a factor of 4... to bad that went to some other owner.
I can't bear to look at what Apple stock is at now.
Look at the mortality tables. You are least likely to die when you are 10 years old. Big enough to be able to fight off (or have already fought off) childhood illnesses, yet small enough not to be hurt as much in falls and collisions.
You make an assumption here; that is, the reason for increased human lifespan can be traced back to cheap energy in the form of oil. This is simply not the case. The reason for increased lifespans, and massive population growth, has and always will be the industrial revolution.
And the industrial revolution was built on engines. Steam engines at first, because that was what they could make. Now, modern industrial economies require oil and electricity. Modern, industrial agriculture certainly requires significant amounts of oil and Natural Gas (as a feedstock for fertilizers and pesticides). Without modern industrial agriculture, lifespans would be significantly reduced.
When the oil becomes expensive, food will become expensive. And then what will the poor eat?
That fuel was aluminum powder. The same fuel as in a thermite reaction.
The Hindenberg ignited from a static electric spark; at least, that's the explanation I heard. Then the skin fabric, with its powdered aluminum paint, burned (any bright flames in the movie are from the skin fabric burning; hydrogen burns with an invisible flame). Then the gas bags ignited, and fed the flames all over.
And a significant combustible ingredient in the dope was... aluminum powder. Used to reflect sunlight. Sunlight would heat the gas in the gas bags, increasing pressure and losses. Was the powder a good idea or no? Think... thermite.
Slashdot Mirror
Why did the XBox "win" the last generation of consoles? Marketing.
So much misinformation, so little time.
IBM never "opened" the PC architecture. Clone companies could _not_ license the technology from IBM. IBM failed to protect their designs for the PC, and thought that they could beat anyone else on volume. Compaq successfully (from a legal point of view) reverse-engineered a compatible BIOS, and IBM was toast.
And I'll point you to the numerous investigations of Microsoft's Business Strategy that involved numerous investigations by the Federal Government for unfair and/or illegal business practices that culminated in their conviction in the Anti-trust lawsuit.
Microsoft got the idea for Word (and a lot of assistance on how to write for GUI apps) from MacWrite and Apple. Not particularly innovative.
Microsoft, Apple, Quicktime, "Knife the baby". Sound familiar?
I notice that the light bulb companies are selling a lot of compact fluorescent and quartz-halogen (and soon, LED) light bulbs. Not incandescents. And the new technology bulbs last a lot longer than the old technology. This is a strong argument that they welcome the improvements in service life that the new technology offers, and if they could have gotten the improvements in service life from the older technology without tradeoffs then they would have.
My wife's Toyota Camry is 12 years old and has 280,000 miles on it. She's going to get another Toyota when this one finally gives up the ghost. I've owned a Dodge, a Ford, and now a Mercury. Each car is better than the last, but I am more likely than not to look at a Honda or a Toyota when I can afford a new car. Too many electrical problems. Too many seal problems.
Planned obsolescence makes the consumer look for a replacement sooner. If the consumer didn't like the value of the last buy because of the item's short life, the consumer may look to other suppliers.
Premium goods command a premium price. Being able to show that your offering will last longer than the competitors' means that your products offer a premium value. Now go and market that value to consumers, and be sure that you can recoup any extra costs of providing that durability.
I wish I had mod points for this. Good point.
So, Kyoto skeptics, what would be fair limits on CO2 for China and USA?
Presume, for a moment, that KWh/person is proportional to CO2/person. KWh/person probably understates CO2 emission for the USA, and overstates it for China.
I hardly think it fair that both countries reduce their usages by 10%.
We could average the two figures, and make both countries get or stay under that cap. 6,000 KWh/person. How about that? Why not?
Networking PCs was as important, maybe more important, than the notion of the PC itself.
And we all know how Microsoft led in that area. Their BlackBird networkins service totally dominates... errr..., wait. They were caught totally off guard by the rise of the internet, and the importance of TCP/IP. They did wake up to the threat posed to their business by the web browser, but so late that they had to break the law to fight it off, and then have an election go there way to get away with it.
The way "linked" particles work is that if you measure a property (say, spin) of the two particles, the measurements will be the same. The interpretation is that when you make one measurement, some information is transmitted to the other particle so that when it is measured the results will be the same. The "transmission" is said to be instantaneous (in whose reference frame?). The value of the property being a hidden variable is another interpretation.
Anyway, I dimly recall being told that there is a proof that such linked particles cannot be used to transmit a message
Yes, Apple paid Xerox for the rights to commercialize anything they saw on the famous PARC visit. The GUI is the one thing Apple noticed.
Apple put a lot of their own work into the GUI as well. Menus that pull-down from a header were an Apple invention. Apple thought they saw overlapping windows at PARC (but didn't) and then built overlapping windows into LISA and Macintosh.
For example, the law may read "Noone in the employ or contracted by any part of the Federal governmeny may torture any person in their custody" with the usual dozen pages of verbiage defining what "custody" and "torture" mean. Then Bush writes "I will interpret the law as if noone means anyone", and signs it.
If that's not writing new laws, I don't know what is.
Your argument goes by the name "Pascal's Wager". This argument leaves off innumerable possibilities. You could end up being punished for not praying to the God who revealed himself to Mohammad. Or you could meet Loki in the afterlife, who is upset with you for not believing. Or ....
We only have the one planet. There aren't any others to choose from.
That humankind has increased atmospheric CO2 is not open to doubt. That increased atmospheric CO2 decreases atmospheric transparency to Infra-red radiation is not open to doubt.
Those who claim that Global Climate Change is (a) not caused by human activity and (b) not really happening, generally publish where their work doesn't have to go through peer-review. In other words, they choose venues where they can say what their corporate paymasters want them to say without being contradicted by folks who inisist on facts.
That's why they are called "bought-off cranks".
It did happen. Bush Administration folks took a look at the documentation, and said "it's a pack of lies". Turns out the evil dictator was correct, and the Bush Administration folks were lying.
It's amazing how quickly people forget.
Microsoft found it very convenient to tell WordPerfect that OS/2 was the answer. That they should put all of their efforts into WordPerfect for OS/2. And then Microsoft pulled out Windows 3, and Word for Windows.
China emits greenhouse gasses at around 1/10th the rate, per person, as the USA. Why should the USA continue it's free ride while those who cause far less change are constrained?
Noone claimed that American CO2 is "evil", nor that Chinese CO2 is "good".
For AMD, a bigger die per chip means fewer chips per wafer.
Which is a problem, when you can't manufacture enough to meet demand.
One force is to have the same code do the same thing on all platforms, so int = 32 bits and long = 64 bits everywhere. The other force is to have ints be the "most efficient" size on each platform.
I remember the days when int might have been 16 bits. That way madness lies.
I chose to sell my Apple stock in the summer of 2001; part of the down payment on a house. The house has not appreciated much. The Apple stock went up by a factor of 4... to bad that went to some other owner.
I can't bear to look at what Apple stock is at now.
Look at the mortality tables. You are least likely to die when you are 10 years old. Big enough to be able to fight off (or have already fought off) childhood illnesses, yet small enough not to be hurt as much in falls and collisions.
India and China together have about a third of the world's population; significantly less than a majority.
When the oil becomes expensive, food will become expensive. And then what will the poor eat?
That fuel was aluminum powder. The same fuel as in a thermite reaction.
The Hindenberg ignited from a static electric spark; at least, that's the explanation I heard. Then the skin fabric, with its powdered aluminum paint, burned (any bright flames in the movie are from the skin fabric burning; hydrogen burns with an invisible flame). Then the gas bags ignited, and fed the flames all over.
And a significant combustible ingredient in the dope was... aluminum powder. Used to reflect sunlight. Sunlight would heat the gas in the gas bags, increasing pressure and losses. Was the powder a good idea or no? Think... thermite.
My car has killed noone. Directly injured noone. My wife's car? same. My previous cars? same.