Is it not amazing that MS is supporting PDF? AFTER MA made its decision with use on Open Document formats? I mean if this is such a great feature, then why was it not discussed at the PDC? Oh yeah, forgot at that time the MA decision was not final. So I wish MS would admit that they are doing this so that they can be MA decision compliant (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/windows/0,390203 96,39215912,00.htm) and not because "the customer" wanted it. BECAUSE the customer has wanted it for ages!
No, the matter of the fact is that Microsoft is not aware of the problem. They know that Google is a problem, but they don't know how to solve the problem because they have the wrong question.
Here are the things that Microsoft does not understand.
1) It's about the community, not the company. Microsoft believes that if they offer compelling technology then people will buy it. The reality is that people have "good enough" and buy into things that make their lives interesting, (VOIP, Google Earth, etc)
2) It's about the content and not the software. The Blackberry device was cool because it gave access to email. Take about the email content and the Blackberry device is not so cool. Google understands this, and Microsoft does not.
3) It's about simplicity and not complexity. Microsoft is about complexity and adding features. Google is about taking a single concept and making it interesting and useful (search, gmail, adwords, etc)
If you look at the latest announcements Microsoft talked about tons and tons API's that mimic what Google has. Yet it is not about tons and tons of API's. It's about enough API to do the job without becoming complex. The problem is that Microsoft has too much "inbreeding" and likes to listen to itself. Is there a solution to Microsoft? Nope, not really. Microsoft's highwater mark was reached a couple of years back.
As much as I like C#/.NET (and I really do) they cannot extinguish Java. Java keeps growing and going! Just there is proof that the dominance of Microsoft is waning.
I agree with you entirely here and was thinking the same thing. Microsoft likes to pride itself on innovation, etc, etc... We can argue about innovation all we want. However, with respect to buying AOL, it is blantely a way to cut off the air pipe from Google. AND this is a black and white example of Microsoft not innovating when competing, causing quite a doubt on their "innovation" argument.
On the other hand all that Google has done is attract talent that Microsoft is right now incapable of holding onto. Frankly, this is not Google's fault, but Microsoft's fault. If Microsoft truly does do this purchase to cut off the air pipe to Google, then I firmly predict Microsoft will go the way of the corporation Wang! Interesting company that when confronted with the next generation of computing had no idea what to do! Sad...
Of course we will adapt. The question if there will still 6 billion of us!
Unless there are fossils to indicate otherwise this is the first time an "intelligent" life form inhabited this planet. And with our intelligence we will be able to adapt! Again I will reiterate how many of us will still be around.
Yesterday I heard an interesting comment on tv regarding global warming. This scientist said, "Sure it would be nice to stop global warming, but it is not physically possible because there are too many people consuming energy". He did not want to say it, but the best way to stop global warming is to "whack" about 75% of the population and the problem would be solved.
His main thesis is that even with renewable energies there are too many of us, and we will impact this planet one way or another.
However, lets get to the reality of patents. First there is no NEED whatsoever to spend 5 billion to develop a test a drug! 5 billion is 5 billion! The argument that you need so much money to bring out a drug is bogus! The biotech industry can do with less, but because it is so easy to pump the clientel it is done!
I detest patents because they don't promote innovation. Cars became popular because a Mr Henry Ford broke the car patent and mass produced a car! It is possible to earn money in an pure competition world.
The reason why biotech is different is because it deals with the lives of humans, and that is why I don't agree with patenting of drugs. I like capitalism, but bio-tech is a vulture preying on the lives of humans. They say, "Oh you want to live? Well here is a drug, but guess what it is going to cost you!" That, my friend, is very scummy! Again not against those that want to earn money, but reasonable money like all other industries!
I am glad that you mentioned Microsoft. First yeah sure Microsoft copies, but Netscape was not the original maker of the web browser, neither was Eudora, neither was WordPerfect. If you accurately check your history books before Netscape was what Tim Berners Lee wrote, before WordPerfect was Wordstart, and the list continues.
In other words you have proved the argument that by copying we get a vibrant industry! You get real innovation! Because copying is evolution as multiple ideas are combined to create a new idea!
Do you eat tofu, or soya? Ever see how that stuff is made? Well, I think tofu and vat grown meat probably have quite a bit in common!
I also find it puzzling that somehow a cow ranging the field eating where they took a dump a while ago is "healthier" than a biologically steril vat growing meat!
invasion of privacy The tort of unjustifiably intruding upon another's right to privacy by appropriating his or her name or likeness, by unreasonably interfering with his or her seclusion, by publicizing information about his or her private affairs that a reasonable person would find objectionable and in which there is no legitimate public interest, or by publicizing information that unreasonably places him or her in a false light see also privacy compare right of privacy zone of privacy
There is also the element that if you are in the public eye, then there is the public interest. Let's say I was a stock holder, would I want the details posted in the CNet article? Sure.
For a comparison let's look at Enron. Let's say that I was a stock holder. Would I have wanted to know how much the then CEO was spending on parties and umbrella holders? Damm right! Maybe if the public had known we would not have had the mess that resulted.
For Google to take such action is very dangerous indeed as it has become a pissing contest. In effect Eric Schmidt has said, "Because you published information about me, Google the corporation will not talk to you?" A smarter approach would have been, "Sorry, I do not like your style, *I* will not talk to you, but if my other Google executives can talk to you if they so choose."
Frankly, this is a Google blunder... Wonder if this is the first of something...
Yes it forces you to do all of the things that make you productive.
Now getting back to C++, you are not forced to do anything except write code like the following:
T & list::iterator::operator* () const {
return current->data; }
Yeah I suppose this is obvious, and simple! (NOT)
I completely gave up on C++ about six months ago. Before that I was half in and half out. Having read BS's article I have to say I am glad I gave up on C++.
I have talked to multiple people who regularly develop using Python, C#, Java, etc and they hate the fact you have so many little details in C++. If you look at my little C++ example look how many details a coder is supposed to take care of. It is insane!
Oddly enough, people still like C. I suppose it is a simple and effective language to get low level coding done.
We all know that there is a terrorist threat. The problem is that often when I hear George Bush talk it sounds like a broken record and everything relates back to terrorism.
So, yes, terrorism is a threat. But so is climate change, aid to africa, and farm subsidies. The reason why I am a bit disheartened is because the Live8 summit created a momentum where the world population for a quick moment looked at what the world leaders were doing.
What I was trying to highlight is that terrorism is a very important issue. However, there are many other important issues eg Aid to Africa, Farm subsidies and Global Warming. This terrorist attack will forcibly put all of these other important issues on the sidelines. This is not good news!
Now about how its harder for terrorists to operate in the US. One has to be very very careful with those types of words. What the German news were pointing out is that the terrorists have created "cell on demand". Cells that come together for the attack, and disperse. The indivduals may not even communicate or live with each other. They operate with one mission in mind and exchange very little communication. In other words you need to track individuals. Tough, very tough!
The German news are saying it is Al-Qada, but in a new form. In the old days cells were formed and these people lived together and raised mayhem throughout the life of the cell. These days individuals come together as "specialist teams" and plan one attack. After the attack they disband.
The news casters were saying that it is a war tactic of the old Beduin where people would come out of the dust, attack and disappear into the dust. These "specialist teams" have specialist keywords and work on their own. In other words they develop unique behavior patterns for each attack making them nearly impossible to track.
What bugs me is that the G8 might have actually talked about African aid, farm subsidies, and global warming. At least that was the agenda by Blair. Now, well the terrorists are playing right into the hands of George Bush!
How people are actual killers and nut jobs? I mean this in all seriousness. It is probably a split percentage point. How many people can watch a movie with gore and walk home without thinking twice? Probably 99.x percent of the people on this planet.
The problem with his blog entry is that he talking about the vast majority and not the absolute minority. And while I don't think that video games on their own create killing machines, they are an influence. That is the problem, the summation of all factors is what causes the problems!
Here is the kicker, in his last statement he says the killers were "f'd up". Well, duh, yeah! However, they blended in since our society does not think twice about violence and that is a problem.
I am very glad you referenced a document from 1880!!! Because after the second world war German was massively changed. For example, German used the latin letter set after the second world war.
While I speak German, and my wife is learning German, there are issues. But when you critique German, at least critique modern German. It is sort of me saying, "Gee English easy? Look at Shakespear."
Hmmm, lets see: Digital, Wang, Compaq, Unisys, Cray, Honeywell, Burroughs, Control Data, NCR, Sperry, and XEROX.
Some of these companies still exist, but they are irrelevant in the computer industry. Even many of those companies that still exist (eg HP) they are not relevant in the computer industry. There is only one company from that era that is still relevant, and that is IBM. Why? They swallowed their pride and changed tack. The IBM from the 70's is not the IBM of 2000's.
Frankly, Microsoft does not have this ability. They do not want to accept the new rules of the software industry. While one can argue on the merits of Open Source, the matter of the fact is that Open Source is like globalization in that you cannot stop it. It is here, and it is part of our reality. So you need to deal with it, not avoid it, or pretend that their software is that much better.
Huh, lack of decent freeware software? You are kidding right? There is a ton of decent freeware software (some is advertising supported, and some not).
I use Linux, OSX, and Windows, and if one thing can be said Windows has momentum BECAUSE it has all types of software freeware, and commercialware.
Developers on Windows will not use QT for their commercial apps. The main problem is the cost. http://www.trolltech.com/products/qt/pricing.html. You are talking anywhere from 3000 to 5500 USD. Those people doing shareware or freeware, and who DO NOT want to give out the sources will not invest that kind of money for an SDK. You still will most likely need to buy an IDE, and compiler. And the moment you purchase Visual Studio you don't need a GUI toolkit.
The argument of cross-platform does not spin either because it means a 5500 USD investment, which has to pay off. If were doing cross-platform using C++ I would use either GTK, or wxWidget.
And how do you know it did not happen quickly? Lets be frank, there have been multiple mass extinctions. And many of these happen in the wink of a eye WRT to the earth.
During the times of the vikings in Labrador they used to be able to grow grapes. They found grape seeds in the settlements. Try growing grapes now in Labrador. Not a chance!
I agree global warming is happening, but we are generally powerless to do anything. If we REALLY wanted to change global warming, then we need to whack off about 2/3 of our population. So unless you happen to volunteer, you know for the sake of our planet, there is not that much we can do.
Think of about how much our planet has changed because people, and the infrastructure that is needed to support the people. It is impossible not to impact our environment. I know this is going to sound silly, but imagine how much heat is generated by six billion bodies, and their associated infrastructure? Not insignificant!
[teflon-suit] Piracy is a good way of advertisement until it becomes rampant! In the good ol' days people did pirate and did so because lack of money in college. However, what is different these days is that people pirate because they expect it! People are blatant about piracy and are not afraid to say they are pirating!
This is a big shift and has caused people to pirate and not pay on principle. I find this especially true among the Open Source Free-Loaders. Please understand me properly as these people who use Open Source, cry about the virtues and how everything should be Free and Open Source, but do not contribute back in any form. I find these people to be too damm cheap and use the Open Source cloak as way to explain their actions, which includes rampant piracy.
Now regarding the comment about not loosing any money because, you would have never bought the software in the first place. My answer is, why is that software being used in the first place? If said software holds no value, then why is being used? Because if said software is used, then it holds some value, and therefore must be paid for. If somebody does not pay and uses this as an excuse it is called theft! For example, go to magazine shop or book store and say, "Hey I am not going to buy these magazines or books, but I want to spend the day here." I am sure that you will be escorted off the premises. Stores, and companies are friendly and try to be helpful, but do expect you to buy something! We seem to have forgotten the latter! [/teflon-suit]
For once I wish Microsoft would stop the "This is the most important blah blah", or "It will exceed blah blah!".
If there is one thing that Microsoft has proven in the last five years is that they CANNOT exceed what is on the market! I am a big fan of.NET and code in it daily, but.NET is NOT taking away marketshare from the Java market.
I wish FOR ONCE, they would develop something and stop the damm hype machine! People critque how long it takes Open Source to finish a product. Frankly Microsoft ain't doing much better!
Re:it's simple, but...
on
Just a Phone?
·
· Score: 1
I know it is an untapped market. In the article they thought it would be a good future idea to have a dedicated one touch help phone. This is already available in Switzerland and has been for the past year or so.
Piracy is an issue on the Internet and it is getting worse. Lets face it, if there is one thing that Open Source and Closed source can agree on is piracy. Piracy is a violation of copyright, and imagine the uproar in the Open Source community if 75% of individuals used Open Source for products and did not disclose the modifications? There would be cries for "bloody murder"!!!!
These days there are simply too many people who are too eager to download cracks. Think of it this way. Shareware is distributed via the Internet, meaning a user of shareware is Internet savy. This means it is easy to find a crack, and hence not pay a cent.
Shareware authors generally don't mind some pirating, but some people are loosing like 75% of their income. They do not measure it by downloads, but by support questions, and drop off in income.
Here is the trick, shareware author comes out with software, sales come in. Shareware author watches the crack sites and sees when a crack comes out. Shareware income drops like a rock.
Microsoft only missed one main boat called the Internet, and they caught up pretty quick because it was focused. It was a single task called the Internet. Now there is not a single target, but multiple. There is search, maps, gaming boxes, cell phones, etc. And they (Microsoft) are trying to become master of all. It ain't gonna happen!
As an example of how Microsoft missed the boat, consider GMail. Hotmail could have been improved and made better, yet GMail cleaned decked with something as trivial as Web Mail...
As an example look of how the software market of the future will look like consider Java and Linux. Both of these markets are incredibly diverse where some people make money and some not. Yet there is no single company that can claim to be the "single" company. Microsoft has to learn that software in the 21'th century has changed dramatically.
Slashdot Mirror
There is blue tooth built in so then where you don't have WiFi you can use your cell phone and blue tooth to access the Internet.
Is it not amazing that MS is supporting PDF? AFTER MA made its decision with use on Open Document formats? I mean if this is such a great feature, then why was it not discussed at the PDC? Oh yeah, forgot at that time the MA decision was not final. So I wish MS would admit that they are doing this so that they can be MA decision compliant (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/windows/0,390203 96,39215912,00.htm) and not because "the customer" wanted it. BECAUSE the customer has wanted it for ages!
No, the matter of the fact is that Microsoft is not aware of the problem. They know that Google is a problem, but they don't know how to solve the problem because they have the wrong question.
Here are the things that Microsoft does not understand.
1) It's about the community, not the company. Microsoft believes that if they offer compelling technology then people will buy it. The reality is that people have "good enough" and buy into things that make their lives interesting, (VOIP, Google Earth, etc)
2) It's about the content and not the software. The Blackberry device was cool because it gave access to email. Take about the email content and the Blackberry device is not so cool. Google understands this, and Microsoft does not.
3) It's about simplicity and not complexity. Microsoft is about complexity and adding features. Google is about taking a single concept and making it interesting and useful (search, gmail, adwords, etc)
If you look at the latest announcements Microsoft talked about tons and tons API's that mimic what Google has. Yet it is not about tons and tons of API's. It's about enough API to do the job without becoming complex. The problem is that Microsoft has too much "inbreeding" and likes to listen to itself. Is there a solution to Microsoft? Nope, not really. Microsoft's highwater mark was reached a couple of years back.
As much as I like C#/.NET (and I really do) they cannot extinguish Java. Java keeps growing and going! Just there is proof that the dominance of Microsoft is waning.
I agree with you entirely here and was thinking the same thing. Microsoft likes to pride itself on innovation, etc, etc... We can argue about innovation all we want. However, with respect to buying AOL, it is blantely a way to cut off the air pipe from Google. AND this is a black and white example of Microsoft not innovating when competing, causing quite a doubt on their "innovation" argument.
On the other hand all that Google has done is attract talent that Microsoft is right now incapable of holding onto. Frankly, this is not Google's fault, but Microsoft's fault. If Microsoft truly does do this purchase to cut off the air pipe to Google, then I firmly predict Microsoft will go the way of the corporation Wang! Interesting company that when confronted with the next generation of computing had no idea what to do! Sad...
Of course we will adapt. The question if there will still 6 billion of us!
Unless there are fossils to indicate otherwise this is the first time an "intelligent" life form inhabited this planet. And with our intelligence we will be able to adapt! Again I will reiterate how many of us will still be around.
Yesterday I heard an interesting comment on tv regarding global warming. This scientist said, "Sure it would be nice to stop global warming, but it is not physically possible because there are too many people consuming energy". He did not want to say it, but the best way to stop global warming is to "whack" about 75% of the population and the problem would be solved.
His main thesis is that even with renewable energies there are too many of us, and we will impact this planet one way or another.
I personally think you skimmed the article.
However, lets get to the reality of patents. First there is no NEED whatsoever to spend 5 billion to develop a test a drug! 5 billion is 5 billion! The argument that you need so much money to bring out a drug is bogus! The biotech industry can do with less, but because it is so easy to pump the clientel it is done!
I detest patents because they don't promote innovation. Cars became popular because a Mr Henry Ford broke the car patent and mass produced a car! It is possible to earn money in an pure competition world.
The reason why biotech is different is because it deals with the lives of humans, and that is why I don't agree with patenting of drugs. I like capitalism, but bio-tech is a vulture preying on the lives of humans. They say, "Oh you want to live? Well here is a drug, but guess what it is going to cost you!" That, my friend, is very scummy! Again not against those that want to earn money, but reasonable money like all other industries!
I am glad that you mentioned Microsoft. First yeah sure Microsoft copies, but Netscape was not the original maker of the web browser, neither was Eudora, neither was WordPerfect. If you accurately check your history books before Netscape was what Tim Berners Lee wrote, before WordPerfect was Wordstart, and the list continues.
In other words you have proved the argument that by copying we get a vibrant industry! You get real innovation! Because copying is evolution as multiple ideas are combined to create a new idea!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/11/04111 8104010.htm
And other websites put the date at which Humans came to North America to about 50,000 years ago.
Do you eat tofu, or soya? Ever see how that stuff is made? Well, I think tofu and vat grown meat probably have quite a bit in common!
I also find it puzzling that somehow a cow ranging the field eating where they took a dump a while ago is "healthier" than a biologically steril vat growing meat!
A definition of invasion of privacy is as follows: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/inva sion+of+privacy
And http://www.answers.com/topic/invasion-of-privacy
invasion of privacy The tort of unjustifiably intruding upon another's right to privacy by appropriating his or her name or likeness, by unreasonably interfering with his or her seclusion, by publicizing information about his or her private affairs that a reasonable person would find objectionable and in which there is no legitimate public interest, or by publicizing information that unreasonably places him or her in a false light see also privacy compare right of privacy zone of privacy
There is also the element that if you are in the public eye, then there is the public interest. Let's say I was a stock holder, would I want the details posted in the CNet article? Sure.
For a comparison let's look at Enron. Let's say that I was a stock holder. Would I have wanted to know how much the then CEO was spending on parties and umbrella holders? Damm right! Maybe if the public had known we would not have had the mess that resulted.
For Google to take such action is very dangerous indeed as it has become a pissing contest. In effect Eric Schmidt has said, "Because you published information about me, Google the corporation will not talk to you?" A smarter approach would have been, "Sorry, I do not like your style, *I* will not talk to you, but if my other Google executives can talk to you if they so choose."
Frankly, this is a Google blunder... Wonder if this is the first of something...
Yes it forces you to do all of the things that make you productive.
Now getting back to C++, you are not forced to do anything except write code like the following:
T & list::iterator::operator* () const
{
return current->data;
}
Yeah I suppose this is obvious, and simple! (NOT)
I completely gave up on C++ about six months ago. Before that I was half in and half out. Having read BS's article I have to say I am glad I gave up on C++.
I have talked to multiple people who regularly develop using Python, C#, Java, etc and they hate the fact you have so many little details in C++. If you look at my little C++ example look how many details a coder is supposed to take care of. It is insane!
Oddly enough, people still like C. I suppose it is a simple and effective language to get low level coding done.
Send me an email and I will tell you what I think we should do! I just don't want to post it publically.
We all know that there is a terrorist threat. The problem is that often when I hear George Bush talk it sounds like a broken record and everything relates back to terrorism.
So, yes, terrorism is a threat. But so is climate change, aid to africa, and farm subsidies. The reason why I am a bit disheartened is because the Live8 summit created a momentum where the world population for a quick moment looked at what the world leaders were doing.
What I was trying to highlight is that terrorism is a very important issue. However, there are many other important issues eg Aid to Africa, Farm subsidies and Global Warming. This terrorist attack will forcibly put all of these other important issues on the sidelines. This is not good news!
Now about how its harder for terrorists to operate in the US. One has to be very very careful with those types of words. What the German news were pointing out is that the terrorists have created "cell on demand". Cells that come together for the attack, and disperse. The indivduals may not even communicate or live with each other. They operate with one mission in mind and exchange very little communication. In other words you need to track individuals. Tough, very tough!
The German news are saying it is Al-Qada, but in a new form. In the old days cells were formed and these people lived together and raised mayhem throughout the life of the cell. These days individuals come together as "specialist teams" and plan one attack. After the attack they disband.
The news casters were saying that it is a war tactic of the old Beduin where people would come out of the dust, attack and disappear into the dust. These "specialist teams" have specialist keywords and work on their own. In other words they develop unique behavior patterns for each attack making them nearly impossible to track.
What bugs me is that the G8 might have actually talked about African aid, farm subsidies, and global warming. At least that was the agenda by Blair. Now, well the terrorists are playing right into the hands of George Bush!
How people are actual killers and nut jobs? I mean this in all seriousness. It is probably a split percentage point. How many people can watch a movie with gore and walk home without thinking twice? Probably 99.x percent of the people on this planet.
The problem with his blog entry is that he talking about the vast majority and not the absolute minority. And while I don't think that video games on their own create killing machines, they are an influence. That is the problem, the summation of all factors is what causes the problems!
Here is the kicker, in his last statement he says the killers were "f'd up". Well, duh, yeah! However, they blended in since our society does not think twice about violence and that is a problem.
I am very glad you referenced a document from 1880!!! Because after the second world war German was massively changed. For example, German used the latin letter set after the second world war.
While I speak German, and my wife is learning German, there are issues. But when you critique German, at least critique modern German. It is sort of me saying, "Gee English easy? Look at Shakespear."
Hmmm, lets see:
Digital, Wang, Compaq, Unisys, Cray, Honeywell, Burroughs, Control Data, NCR, Sperry, and XEROX.
Some of these companies still exist, but they are irrelevant in the computer industry. Even many of those companies that still exist (eg HP) they are not relevant in the computer industry. There is only one company from that era that is still relevant, and that is IBM. Why? They swallowed their pride and changed tack. The IBM from the 70's is not the IBM of 2000's.
Frankly, Microsoft does not have this ability. They do not want to accept the new rules of the software industry. While one can argue on the merits of Open Source, the matter of the fact is that Open Source is like globalization in that you cannot stop it. It is here, and it is part of our reality. So you need to deal with it, not avoid it, or pretend that their software is that much better.
Huh, lack of decent freeware software? You are kidding right? There is a ton of decent freeware software (some is advertising supported, and some not).
. You are talking anywhere from 3000 to 5500 USD. Those people doing shareware or freeware, and who DO NOT want to give out the sources will not invest that kind of money for an SDK. You still will most likely need to buy an IDE, and compiler. And the moment you purchase Visual Studio you don't need a GUI toolkit.
I use Linux, OSX, and Windows, and if one thing can be said Windows has momentum BECAUSE it has all types of software freeware, and commercialware.
Developers on Windows will not use QT for their commercial apps. The main problem is the cost. http://www.trolltech.com/products/qt/pricing.html
The argument of cross-platform does not spin either because it means a 5500 USD investment, which has to pay off. If were doing cross-platform using C++ I would use either GTK, or wxWidget.
And how do you know it did not happen quickly? Lets be frank, there have been multiple mass extinctions. And many of these happen in the wink of a eye WRT to the earth.
During the times of the vikings in Labrador they used to be able to grow grapes. They found grape seeds in the settlements. Try growing grapes now in Labrador. Not a chance!
I agree global warming is happening, but we are generally powerless to do anything. If we REALLY wanted to change global warming, then we need to whack off about 2/3 of our population. So unless you happen to volunteer, you know for the sake of our planet, there is not that much we can do.
Think of about how much our planet has changed because people, and the infrastructure that is needed to support the people. It is impossible not to impact our environment. I know this is going to sound silly, but imagine how much heat is generated by six billion bodies, and their associated infrastructure? Not insignificant!
[teflon-suit]
Piracy is a good way of advertisement until it becomes rampant! In the good ol' days people did pirate and did so because lack of money in college. However, what is different these days is that people pirate because they expect it! People are blatant about piracy and are not afraid to say they are pirating!
This is a big shift and has caused people to pirate and not pay on principle. I find this especially true among the Open Source Free-Loaders. Please understand me properly as these people who use Open Source, cry about the virtues and how everything should be Free and Open Source, but do not contribute back in any form. I find these people to be too damm cheap and use the Open Source cloak as way to explain their actions, which includes rampant piracy.
Now regarding the comment about not loosing any money because, you would have never bought the software in the first place. My answer is, why is that software being used in the first place? If said software holds no value, then why is being used? Because if said software is used, then it holds some value, and therefore must be paid for. If somebody does not pay and uses this as an excuse it is called theft! For example, go to magazine shop or book store and say, "Hey I am not going to buy these magazines or books, but I want to spend the day here." I am sure that you will be escorted off the premises. Stores, and companies are friendly and try to be helpful, but do expect you to buy something! We seem to have forgotten the latter!
[/teflon-suit]
For once I wish Microsoft would stop the "This is the most important blah blah", or "It will exceed blah blah!".
.NET and code in it daily, but .NET is NOT taking away marketshare from the Java market.
If there is one thing that Microsoft has proven in the last five years is that they CANNOT exceed what is on the market! I am a big fan of
I wish FOR ONCE, they would develop something and stop the damm hype machine! People critque how long it takes Open Source to finish a product. Frankly Microsoft ain't doing much better!
42!
I know it is an untapped market. In the article they thought it would be a good future idea to have a dedicated one touch help phone. This is already available in Switzerland and has been for the past year or so.
Piracy is an issue on the Internet and it is getting worse. Lets face it, if there is one thing that Open Source and Closed source can agree on is piracy. Piracy is a violation of copyright, and imagine the uproar in the Open Source community if 75% of individuals used Open Source for products and did not disclose the modifications? There would be cries for "bloody murder"!!!!
These days there are simply too many people who are too eager to download cracks. Think of it this way. Shareware is distributed via the Internet, meaning a user of shareware is Internet savy. This means it is easy to find a crack, and hence not pay a cent.
Shareware authors generally don't mind some pirating, but some people are loosing like 75% of their income. They do not measure it by downloads, but by support questions, and drop off in income.
Here is the trick, shareware author comes out with software, sales come in. Shareware author watches the crack sites and sees when a crack comes out. Shareware income drops like a rock.
Microsoft only missed one main boat called the Internet, and they caught up pretty quick because it was focused. It was a single task called the Internet. Now there is not a single target, but multiple. There is search, maps, gaming boxes, cell phones, etc. And they (Microsoft) are trying to become master of all. It ain't gonna happen!
As an example of how Microsoft missed the boat, consider GMail. Hotmail could have been improved and made better, yet GMail cleaned decked with something as trivial as Web Mail...
As an example look of how the software market of the future will look like consider Java and Linux. Both of these markets are incredibly diverse where some people make money and some not. Yet there is no single company that can claim to be the "single" company. Microsoft has to learn that software in the 21'th century has changed dramatically.