You guys are focusing too much on how he got at that number and not enough on how ridiculous and opportunistic he sounds.
I seem to recall a couple of cases where big companies decided they wanted a particular domain name, and paid the holder about $10k for it. In those cases, they didn't have any trademark right to the name, so they basically paid fair market value.
In this case, Mike Rowe is taking the position that Microsoft doesn't have a right to the domain mikerowesoft.com, so he asked a fair market value price for it. The fact that they first made an offer for it implies that they agree, and were opening a negotiation for sale of the domain, rather than taking it over via their trademark.
The fact that he asked $10k won't automatically mean that he's *legally* trying to profit from the similarity. Then there's the fact that he didn't approach them... they approached him, and were the ones who initially suggested the domain had monetary value to them.
I'm sure his lawyer is kicking him by now anyway, but hey, he's got pro bono representation already lined up, so he can't be in that much trouble yet.
Take a look at 15 USC 1125. Specifically the "cyberpiracy prevention" part (d). . . . And I see the article mentions it's a copyright violation, but I don't see how that would fit this at all. Seems like a pretty straightforward trademark issue to me...
The kid is in Canada, and is subject to Canadian law. I just figured when reading the article that either (a) the author was an idiot that doesn't know the difference between copyright and trademark or that (b) Canadian law protects trademarks differently, maybe as a subset of copyright law.
I'm not sure what Canadian law has to say about domain names, though, or how they define confusingly similar.
[sales rep-tile] "Now sweetheart that's very complicated, are you sure you should try that?"
I can only hope that my response would be (if I was thinking fast enough)...
"No, it's not really that complicated... if you'd like, I'll teach you how to do it sometime. My rate is $40/hour plus materials."
Fortunately, though, I've never had an experience quite *that* bad. Sure, there was the guy at Best Buy who really thought we should buy some more memory for the bargain box computer we were getting (a friend was donating it to a housebound diabetic couple) and I finally told him, firmly, that I could get better memory cheaper online and install it myself, which ended the conversation. To his credit, though, he was treating both me and my male friend the same.
the biggest issue isnt so much a stereotype... it's that the vast majority of women want nothing to do with cars and computer internals.
Have you ever been discouraged about anything in your life?
Did you ever have the experience of telling your parents you wanted to do such-and-such when you grew up, and having them say "Well, dear, that's nice, but do you think it's really realistic?" Or telling your friends you're going to ask such-and-such hot chick out, and them saying "Yeah, right, in your dreams... don't even bother!"
Now imagine walking through your WHOLE LIFE with people telling you how complicated things like cars and computer internals are. How eager would you be to find out?
The problem is that people treat women like they aren't *supposed* to know certain things... from the moment they're born. It's not exactly a simple matter to just *decide* to be different and find out that stuff. I'm the way I am because my mom (and dad) made a conscious effort to prevent me from being channelled in that way... sometimes even going too far, like when I was five and my mom almost gave away a brand-new frilly dress my aunt gave me for my birthday, because she didn't want me to get a princess complex. (Then she decided it would do less harm in my hands than in the hands of some poor girl whose parents didn't know any better.)
So consequently, I'm the one who walked into the parts department and got a replacement bulb for the brakelight on my husband's car, and replaced it while he was waiting in line for the mechanic to fix it. I'm the one who my (male) friends ask what kind of video card or motherboard they should get. But I'm still the one who has something to prove every single time I talk to someone new about anything technical.
I've just had a quick scan through the initial (100 or so) responses to this story. It seems there is little variation between the responses; most of them fall into one of the following categories...
I had noticed this as well.
I think it's likely that women may pay higher prices for electronics, though not neccessarily because they're ignorant. Part of it may be because the "cheap" places, like Fry's, still feel quite hostile to them. It's also probably in part because they have other things to deal with... if you work full-time, have to pick up the kids from day care, and get home to cook dinner, you don't have the time to pore over the selections and check out all the reviews before you choose a product.
But I think part of it is also because a lot of men hate shopping, and even if they really want something, they often won't bother getting it for themselves. My husband now has an MP-3 player and a digital camera... because my mom bought them for him for his birthday and Christmas. We have our first DVD player because my mom bought it for my birthday back in November. She also got us the new nifty cordless Plantronics headset phone, and I owned the stereo before we got married. (The TV was his, but I helped him pick it out.)
I think these figures are probably fairly accurate, simply because most home electronics are just that... "home"... and the home is still mostly taken care of by women, as is most of the shopping. Based on my own experience, I think that the data on how women are treated when shopping for electronics is probably also accurate. I'd love to know more about the methodology and what questions they asked, but it doesn't seem nearly as half-assed to me as it does to a lot of the posters.
On the other hand, most of the folks posting here have absolutely NO concept what it might be like to shop as a woman, partly because their misogynistic attitudes leave them with little experience shopping with women. I think your statement about feeling attacked probably hits a few nails right on the head.
Did you ever stop to think that maybe all the responses are of a tongue-in-cheek tone, because everyone sees this story as a load of b.s. ?
This would be relevant if, say, the responses were critical of the *article*, but a large proportion of them are critical of and patronizing toward women.
Which sort of proves some of the points in the article...
Here at slashdot, we all shop for electronics regularly, and we would notice if women were the majority of people buying the "tech" items in stores.
Obviously your own personal observations, which I'm sure you record religiously every time you go shopping for electronics, are more valid than a telephone survey done by a professional market research firm with a sample size of 1,002. It's probably also more accurate since your observations would be generally limited to a single community or urban area, while their survey was diluted by conducting a nationwide sample.
What probably *is* revealing about your post is that maybe women aren't buying electronics in the same places you are. Stores that specialize in electronics still are somewhat "hostile" environments for women. Instead, they're buying their stereos, TVs, and other home electronics from major department stores where they feel more comfortable... and probably pay higher prices. Which may account for some of the increased market share reported in the article.
And which still is a more provocative topic than what percentage of "home electronics" are vibrators...
Also fortunate in this sense, bricks and mortars RARELY have the best prices and online stores have yet to discriminate in the least when I purchase all the tech products for my document imaging business and my personal armory of gadgets.
Actually, I had it happen, sort of...;-)
I bought parts for a computer to put together for a friend. I haven't gotten around to upgrading to an SATA hard drive on my own machine yet, so I was going through the adventure of getting Win2k to install on one for the first time. I contacted Asus tech support (the motherboard manufacturer) via the website, and got two irrelevant canned responses before I nearly blew up at the guy, demanding that he actually *read* my inquiry and *respond* to it, rather than just letting Kana search for keywords and spit out text that helps folks who can't find the power button.
I shortly got a very apologetic and somewhat useful response... "I'm sorry, sir..."
I let him go with the assumption. I decided at that point that I didn't want to lose the credibility I'd so recently gained by revealing my true chromosomal makeup. (But it's truly sad that this is a decision anyone would have to make...)
Well isn't that some sad, stereotyped shit(?) According to the article, women complained about being patronized in tech stores. But what the hell kind of image of women do the tech manufacturers have?
If I saw an ad for something that was set in the kitchen, and it was an item that I would expect only women to be interested in anyway, I would find it to be "stereotyped shit..." i.e. "gee, this is a woman's thing, let's put it where women are."
But if you're trying to sell something that's traditionally marketed to men, putting it in the kitchen makes a very clear message about who you're talking to... because, sure, there are men who cook, but most of the ones *I* know are gay. (After a couple years of training, my husband occasionally knows about stuff that's in the refrigerator without me telling him.) So this is a way to get a woman's attention and communicate that this ad is not talking to the guy over there.
Is it the *best* way? I dunno. But in a case where you're trying to dramatically shift the focus, it makes some sense.
She bought the p4 anyway, because it came in black.
And I just finished building a computer for a friend of mine, who insisted that it had to look *good*, even if it cost more. This classmate needed a black or silver keyboard (what do you mean, "ergonomic?"), a shiny case with a window on the side, and blue LEDs.
I tried to steer him toward some more practical items, but he absolutely insisted. So, I went ahead and built it for him as requested, and it *does* look cool (and works pretty well, too, because I picked out good innards).
So now he's telling all his friends "You need a computer? You should hire my friend... she's awesome!"
Just goes to show, all kinds of people make all kinds of decisions.
People tend to be pretty sensitive about their purchasing experiences when shopping. With cars, there are usually a lot of competitors within easy driving range. If a woman feels peeved that she's not being properly treated, she simply won't shop at that store. The free market should take care of things, to be honest.
*If* someone offers an alternative. In a world where 1% of female respondents think that electronic products are actually geared toward them, this probably means that 1% of women want the same things from products that the men in the focus groups do, and that no one is trying to sell women any electronics.
You can't choose an alternative that doesn't exist. Yes, Airport Honda lost my business by ignoring me when I walked in and barely responding when I asked anything, and Santa Monica Honda gained a customer for life by greeting me at the door and talking to *me*, the person asking the questions, instead of my then-fiance. But what if every Honda dealer within a reasonable distance of where I lived had treated me the same way? What would I have done then? No one else was offering the car I wanted. Instead, I probably would have done my best to brazen it out with the most convenient location, using my SO as a mouthpiece when absolutely necessary. Which is what a lot of women end up doing with a lot of different types of business.
Stereotyping, or prejudice, as you're describing it, isn't the same as the situation the parent was describing.
Assuming that someone speaks English in a predominantly-English speaking area/country/store/whatever is a reasonable prejudice (in the classic sense of the word). It is not reasonable to ask each person what language they want to use before using it. It is also reasonable to treat people who walk into your store as potential customers, and probably reasonable to treat strangers on a dark street with some caution.
On the other hand, failing to hear someone because of what they look like is a non-functional prejudice. It's not that they *ask* him and not his wife because they assume he will know and she won't. It's that she *tells* them something and they simply ignore it until he repeats it. It's like assuming that someone does *not* speak English because they look Asian, and not noticing when they talk to you in a perfect American accent.
women ARE generally less competent than men when it comes to construction.
Based on...? When it comes to how they want a house extension to work, women usually have a *much* better idea of what will work for the family than men do. They spend more time in the house and have to use a greater percentage of it. Most men have no experience with construction, and sometimes will *pretend* to understand or know things they don't to protect a macho idea that they're supposed to know this thing.
They discriminate as a matter of efficiency and accuracy not to serve their egos.
It is not more efficient to have to get instructions twice, the second time from someone who is not there in front of you.
The PS2 looks like something out of a Terminator movie, as do most l33t g4m3r computer cases.
And yet, my husband and I both have nice shiny Antec cases, and while I can push the reset button with my index finger, he has to use a pen or a screwdriver because his finger is too big to get at the recessed button.
Still, in general, I find that between being left-handed and female, buttons and gagets just don't fit all that well.
Here's the kicker though: You aren't in their target market. There's target market is women and men who like to chat socially online. They've recently partnered with iVilliage to bring more women to There. They will openly tell you that FPS gamers and developers are certainly welcome, but not who they're trying to attract.
Oh, how I love assumptions...
1) I'm female 2) I'm NOT an FPS player, at all... my ex-husband, after about a year of begging, got me to try Half-Life for half an hour, after which I nearly threw up from Quake-sickness 3) I have played several MMOGs and play on other web-based "social" gaming sites 4) I'm not even employed in the IT industry (anymore)
Although some industrial control and SCADA firms are moving towards porting their stuff to Linux, many customers are very opposed to anything without 20+ years of history behind it.
Go down to your local HMO hospital and look in the parking lot. I will betcha that most of the nice hardware does not belong to the physicians. Rather, it belongs to the managment, particularly in HMO's that are vertically organized and provide the insurance as well as the health care delivery.
You mean like Kaiser Permanente?
My stepfather is a retired Kaiser cardiologist. Yeah, he has a pretty lame car. But that's because he prefers to spend the few million he's saved up over the years on trips to Borneo and $10k gifts to causes he likes.
He might have had a nominally higher income in private practice, but with the overhead (especially malpractice insurance) it's unlikely he would have taken home much more. And it seems he didn't really need to, either.
I play There, and Firebird is my default browser. Not all that difficult to make a shortcut that opens IE for the game.
Well, like I said (though not so clearly), the installation FAILED because I didn't have IE as my default browser and wouldn't change that setting. Perhaps you changed it for the purposes of installation and then changed it back, or they fixed this and didn't bother to tell me (I emailed them politely informing them that I would be unable to participate in the beta until they fixed this problem, and that I would appreciate a notification if/when they did get it resolved... they responded with a polite "not gonna happen").
I got into their Beta (I think everyone did) and never got the game installed because I refused to upgrade to the latest IE *and* make it my default browser.
Good to know that someone's doing something to counteract all this Open Source in Government nonsense...
Um. Sorry, should have been more clear. In general, I've found, if the servers are NT, then the clients are too.
Still don't think that's relevant to the poster's comment. There may be a correlation, but that doesn't imply causality. If most clients are Windows-based because that's what people are familiar with, then most clients will be Windows-based whether the server is NT or *nix or something else. [Insert stupid analogy here.]
I read the article, went to my city's home page (www.weho.org) and submitted a comment to the city council. Short and to the point: I have long wanted governments to increase use of OS because it will lower costs and improve transparency of government operations. Here's a collaborative project they could get involved in (article link). Please consider. And since I actually live in a city that's small and progressive enough to think about it, maybe something will happen.
But seriously, that's what the article asks us to do. So if you like the idea, don't just say so here... tell your City Council. Tell them even if they're a bunch of decrepit morons firmly entrenched in a monolithic and incomprehensible government bureaucracy. Tell them even if it's a couple guys who meet on weekends to go over the problems of a tiny population. But *especially* tell them if, like me, you live in an urban municipality with a progressive, community-supported government and a decent median income.
Slashdot Mirror
Gotta love Cold Fusion... /shudder
You guys are focusing too much on how he got at that number and not enough on how ridiculous and opportunistic he sounds.
I seem to recall a couple of cases where big companies decided they wanted a particular domain name, and paid the holder about $10k for it. In those cases, they didn't have any trademark right to the name, so they basically paid fair market value.
In this case, Mike Rowe is taking the position that Microsoft doesn't have a right to the domain mikerowesoft.com, so he asked a fair market value price for it. The fact that they first made an offer for it implies that they agree, and were opening a negotiation for sale of the domain, rather than taking it over via their trademark.
The fact that he asked $10k won't automatically mean that he's *legally* trying to profit from the similarity. Then there's the fact that he didn't approach them... they approached him, and were the ones who initially suggested the domain had monetary value to them.
I'm sure his lawyer is kicking him by now anyway, but hey, he's got pro bono representation already lined up, so he can't be in that much trouble yet.
Take a look at 15 USC 1125. Specifically the "cyberpiracy prevention" part (d).
.
.
.
And I see the article mentions it's a copyright violation, but I don't see how that would fit this at all. Seems like a pretty straightforward trademark issue to me...
The kid is in Canada, and is subject to Canadian law. I just figured when reading the article that either (a) the author was an idiot that doesn't know the difference between copyright and trademark or that (b) Canadian law protects trademarks differently, maybe as a subset of copyright law.
I'm not sure what Canadian law has to say about domain names, though, or how they define confusingly similar.
However, I'm sure Mike will get a Pro-Bono lawyer (barrister?) who is looking for a win against MicroSoft.
He already has free legal representation, according to the article I read last night.
[sales rep-tile] "Now sweetheart that's very complicated, are you sure you should try that?"
I can only hope that my response would be (if I was thinking fast enough)...
"No, it's not really that complicated... if you'd like, I'll teach you how to do it sometime. My rate is $40/hour plus materials."
Fortunately, though, I've never had an experience quite *that* bad. Sure, there was the guy at Best Buy who really thought we should buy some more memory for the bargain box computer we were getting (a friend was donating it to a housebound diabetic couple) and I finally told him, firmly, that I could get better memory cheaper online and install it myself, which ended the conversation. To his credit, though, he was treating both me and my male friend the same.
the biggest issue isnt so much a stereotype... it's that the vast majority of women want nothing to do with cars and computer internals.
Have you ever been discouraged about anything in your life?
Did you ever have the experience of telling your parents you wanted to do such-and-such when you grew up, and having them say "Well, dear, that's nice, but do you think it's really realistic?" Or telling your friends you're going to ask such-and-such hot chick out, and them saying "Yeah, right, in your dreams... don't even bother!"
Now imagine walking through your WHOLE LIFE with people telling you how complicated things like cars and computer internals are. How eager would you be to find out?
The problem is that people treat women like they aren't *supposed* to know certain things... from the moment they're born. It's not exactly a simple matter to just *decide* to be different and find out that stuff. I'm the way I am because my mom (and dad) made a conscious effort to prevent me from being channelled in that way... sometimes even going too far, like when I was five and my mom almost gave away a brand-new frilly dress my aunt gave me for my birthday, because she didn't want me to get a princess complex. (Then she decided it would do less harm in my hands than in the hands of some poor girl whose parents didn't know any better.)
So consequently, I'm the one who walked into the parts department and got a replacement bulb for the brakelight on my husband's car, and replaced it while he was waiting in line for the mechanic to fix it. I'm the one who my (male) friends ask what kind of video card or motherboard they should get. But I'm still the one who has something to prove every single time I talk to someone new about anything technical.
I've just had a quick scan through the initial (100 or so) responses to this story. It seems there is little variation between the responses; most of them fall into one of the following categories...
I had noticed this as well.
I think it's likely that women may pay higher prices for electronics, though not neccessarily because they're ignorant. Part of it may be because the "cheap" places, like Fry's, still feel quite hostile to them. It's also probably in part because they have other things to deal with... if you work full-time, have to pick up the kids from day care, and get home to cook dinner, you don't have the time to pore over the selections and check out all the reviews before you choose a product.
But I think part of it is also because a lot of men hate shopping, and even if they really want something, they often won't bother getting it for themselves. My husband now has an MP-3 player and a digital camera... because my mom bought them for him for his birthday and Christmas. We have our first DVD player because my mom bought it for my birthday back in November. She also got us the new nifty cordless Plantronics headset phone, and I owned the stereo before we got married. (The TV was his, but I helped him pick it out.)
I think these figures are probably fairly accurate, simply because most home electronics are just that... "home"... and the home is still mostly taken care of by women, as is most of the shopping. Based on my own experience, I think that the data on how women are treated when shopping for electronics is probably also accurate. I'd love to know more about the methodology and what questions they asked, but it doesn't seem nearly as half-assed to me as it does to a lot of the posters.
On the other hand, most of the folks posting here have absolutely NO concept what it might be like to shop as a woman, partly because their misogynistic attitudes leave them with little experience shopping with women. I think your statement about feeling attacked probably hits a few nails right on the head.
Did you ever stop to think that maybe all the responses are of a tongue-in-cheek tone, because everyone sees this story as a load of b.s. ?
This would be relevant if, say, the responses were critical of the *article*, but a large proportion of them are critical of and patronizing toward women.
Which sort of proves some of the points in the article...
Here at slashdot, we all shop for electronics regularly, and we would notice if women were the majority of people buying the "tech" items in stores.
Obviously your own personal observations, which I'm sure you record religiously every time you go shopping for electronics, are more valid than a telephone survey done by a professional market research firm with a sample size of 1,002. It's probably also more accurate since your observations would be generally limited to a single community or urban area, while their survey was diluted by conducting a nationwide sample.
What probably *is* revealing about your post is that maybe women aren't buying electronics in the same places you are. Stores that specialize in electronics still are somewhat "hostile" environments for women. Instead, they're buying their stereos, TVs, and other home electronics from major department stores where they feel more comfortable... and probably pay higher prices. Which may account for some of the increased market share reported in the article.
And which still is a more provocative topic than what percentage of "home electronics" are vibrators...
Also fortunate in this sense, bricks and mortars RARELY have the best prices and online stores have yet to discriminate in the least when I purchase all the tech products for my document imaging business and my personal armory of gadgets.
;-)
Actually, I had it happen, sort of...
I bought parts for a computer to put together for a friend. I haven't gotten around to upgrading to an SATA hard drive on my own machine yet, so I was going through the adventure of getting Win2k to install on one for the first time. I contacted Asus tech support (the motherboard manufacturer) via the website, and got two irrelevant canned responses before I nearly blew up at the guy, demanding that he actually *read* my inquiry and *respond* to it, rather than just letting Kana search for keywords and spit out text that helps folks who can't find the power button.
I shortly got a very apologetic and somewhat useful response... "I'm sorry, sir..."
I let him go with the assumption. I decided at that point that I didn't want to lose the credibility I'd so recently gained by revealing my true chromosomal makeup. (But it's truly sad that this is a decision anyone would have to make...)
Well isn't that some sad, stereotyped shit(?) According to the article, women complained about being patronized in tech stores. But what the hell kind of image of women do the tech manufacturers have?
If I saw an ad for something that was set in the kitchen, and it was an item that I would expect only women to be interested in anyway, I would find it to be "stereotyped shit..." i.e. "gee, this is a woman's thing, let's put it where women are."
But if you're trying to sell something that's traditionally marketed to men, putting it in the kitchen makes a very clear message about who you're talking to... because, sure, there are men who cook, but most of the ones *I* know are gay. (After a couple years of training, my husband occasionally knows about stuff that's in the refrigerator without me telling him.) So this is a way to get a woman's attention and communicate that this ad is not talking to the guy over there.
Is it the *best* way? I dunno. But in a case where you're trying to dramatically shift the focus, it makes some sense.
She bought the p4 anyway, because it came in black.
And I just finished building a computer for a friend of mine, who insisted that it had to look *good*, even if it cost more. This classmate needed a black or silver keyboard (what do you mean, "ergonomic?"), a shiny case with a window on the side, and blue LEDs.
I tried to steer him toward some more practical items, but he absolutely insisted. So, I went ahead and built it for him as requested, and it *does* look cool (and works pretty well, too, because I picked out good innards).
So now he's telling all his friends "You need a computer? You should hire my friend... she's awesome!"
Just goes to show, all kinds of people make all kinds of decisions.
People tend to be pretty sensitive about their purchasing experiences when shopping. With cars, there are usually a lot of competitors within easy driving range. If a woman feels peeved that she's not being properly treated, she simply won't shop at that store. The free market should take care of things, to be honest.
*If* someone offers an alternative. In a world where 1% of female respondents think that electronic products are actually geared toward them, this probably means that 1% of women want the same things from products that the men in the focus groups do, and that no one is trying to sell women any electronics.
You can't choose an alternative that doesn't exist. Yes, Airport Honda lost my business by ignoring me when I walked in and barely responding when I asked anything, and Santa Monica Honda gained a customer for life by greeting me at the door and talking to *me*, the person asking the questions, instead of my then-fiance. But what if every Honda dealer within a reasonable distance of where I lived had treated me the same way? What would I have done then? No one else was offering the car I wanted. Instead, I probably would have done my best to brazen it out with the most convenient location, using my SO as a mouthpiece when absolutely necessary. Which is what a lot of women end up doing with a lot of different types of business.
Stereotyping is a fact of life. GET OVER IT!
Stereotyping, or prejudice, as you're describing it, isn't the same as the situation the parent was describing.
Assuming that someone speaks English in a predominantly-English speaking area/country/store/whatever is a reasonable prejudice (in the classic sense of the word). It is not reasonable to ask each person what language they want to use before using it. It is also reasonable to treat people who walk into your store as potential customers, and probably reasonable to treat strangers on a dark street with some caution.
On the other hand, failing to hear someone because of what they look like is a non-functional prejudice. It's not that they *ask* him and not his wife because they assume he will know and she won't. It's that she *tells* them something and they simply ignore it until he repeats it. It's like assuming that someone does *not* speak English because they look Asian, and not noticing when they talk to you in a perfect American accent.
women ARE generally less competent than men when it comes to construction.
Based on...? When it comes to how they want a house extension to work, women usually have a *much* better idea of what will work for the family than men do. They spend more time in the house and have to use a greater percentage of it. Most men have no experience with construction, and sometimes will *pretend* to understand or know things they don't to protect a macho idea that they're supposed to know this thing.
They discriminate as a matter of efficiency and accuracy not to serve their egos.
It is not more efficient to have to get instructions twice, the second time from someone who is not there in front of you.
The PS2 looks like something out of a Terminator movie, as do most l33t g4m3r computer cases.
And yet, my husband and I both have nice shiny Antec cases, and while I can push the reset button with my index finger, he has to use a pen or a screwdriver because his finger is too big to get at the recessed button.
Still, in general, I find that between being left-handed and female, buttons and gagets just don't fit all that well.
You should actually appologize to William Goldman, he wrote the screenplay.
And the book...
My ex's 1972 Porche 914 got named the Quantum Duck because of a bad muffler that made it sound like lots and lots of quacking....
For example, "I don't live with my parents, so we can use an actual BED" comes to mind.
Or the couch. Or the living room floor. Or the washing machine....
Married life doesn't *have* to be boring.
Hehe, I'll have to share that one with my stepdad next time I see him (if he hasn't heard it already...)
Here's the kicker though: You aren't in their target market. There's target market is women and men who like to chat socially online. They've recently partnered with iVilliage to bring more women to There. They will openly tell you that FPS gamers and developers are certainly welcome, but not who they're trying to attract.
Oh, how I love assumptions...
1) I'm female
2) I'm NOT an FPS player, at all... my ex-husband, after about a year of begging, got me to try Half-Life for half an hour, after which I nearly threw up from Quake-sickness
3) I have played several MMOGs and play on other web-based "social" gaming sites
4) I'm not even employed in the IT industry (anymore)
So I'm EXACTLY their target market, apparently.
Although some industrial control and SCADA firms are moving towards porting their stuff to Linux, many customers are very opposed to anything without 20+ years of history behind it.
You mean like... Windows?
Go down to your local HMO hospital and look in the parking lot. I will betcha that most of the nice hardware does not belong to the physicians. Rather, it belongs to the managment, particularly in HMO's that are vertically organized and provide the insurance as well as the health care delivery.
You mean like Kaiser Permanente?
My stepfather is a retired Kaiser cardiologist. Yeah, he has a pretty lame car. But that's because he prefers to spend the few million he's saved up over the years on trips to Borneo and $10k gifts to causes he likes.
He might have had a nominally higher income in private practice, but with the overhead (especially malpractice insurance) it's unlikely he would have taken home much more. And it seems he didn't really need to, either.
I play There, and Firebird is my default browser. Not all that difficult to make a shortcut that opens IE for the game.
Well, like I said (though not so clearly), the installation FAILED because I didn't have IE as my default browser and wouldn't change that setting. Perhaps you changed it for the purposes of installation and then changed it back, or they fixed this and didn't bother to tell me (I emailed them politely informing them that I would be unable to participate in the beta until they fixed this problem, and that I would appreciate a notification if/when they did get it resolved... they responded with a polite "not gonna happen").
[developed by There Inc.]
I got into their Beta (I think everyone did) and never got the game installed because I refused to upgrade to the latest IE *and* make it my default browser.
Good to know that someone's doing something to counteract all this Open Source in Government nonsense...
Um. Sorry, should have been more clear. In general, I've found, if the servers are NT, then the clients are too.
Still don't think that's relevant to the poster's comment. There may be a correlation, but that doesn't imply causality. If most clients are Windows-based because that's what people are familiar with, then most clients will be Windows-based whether the server is NT or *nix or something else. [Insert stupid analogy here.]
...How about you?
I read the article, went to my city's home page (www.weho.org) and submitted a comment to the city council. Short and to the point: I have long wanted governments to increase use of OS because it will lower costs and improve transparency of government operations. Here's a collaborative project they could get involved in (article link). Please consider. And since I actually live in a city that's small and progressive enough to think about it, maybe something will happen.
But seriously, that's what the article asks us to do. So if you like the idea, don't just say so here... tell your City Council. Tell them even if they're a bunch of decrepit morons firmly entrenched in a monolithic and incomprehensible government bureaucracy. Tell them even if it's a couple guys who meet on weekends to go over the problems of a tiny population. But *especially* tell them if, like me, you live in an urban municipality with a progressive, community-supported government and a decent median income.