... but what's wrong with MS trying to get its revenue for software that they paid to develop?
If you're not pirating software, don't worry about it. In fact, tell them so. If you're not sure, shame on you. Keep better records. And if you're pirating, stop using that software. The rest of us had to pay for it.
(Note that this only applies to businesses. I have my own opinions about consumer software pricing and licensing, and rather like the way Oracle does it, i.e. free for non-commercial use.)
There's nothing wrong with free alternatives. But if you're running a business off of an MS solution, you owe them for as long as you've been doing so. If you don't like it, get away from it - no one's twisting your arm, and there are alternatives available.
There's an excellent update on the Reg explaining the concept of these unsolicited cease and desist letters, incl. the German legal stance on them. Check it out.
Let's assume there won't be a price drop. We already shoulder the cost of piracy in CD's, or so they claim. Therefore, not dropping the price is an admission of one of two things:
1. The copy protection scheme is ineffective.
2. They've been lying about the costs of piracy to extract more money out of us.
Look at the article. All they did was put virtual scratches into the CD and make sure they screwed up the ECC as well.
If anything, I think it's time we put some effort into the scratch-removal parts of MP3 rippers, and that such effort would have the secondary benefit of clearing this little mess up as well.
I wonder, however - what effect would this have on the durability of CD's? If it's already got a virtual defect in it, would it be more susceptible to skipping due to a physical media defect?
Wasn't he just commenting about the attitude of certain OSS proponents painting the remainder of us in a bad light?
I somehow feel we'd be best off if some of the more reasonable and eloquent members of our community got together to deal with the corporate world; sort of a OSS PR department, if you will.
If you want companies to work with us, you might not want to paint us as a threat to intellectual property (yes, there is such a thing, and yes, it's overapplied nowadays.) Telling people we won't play nice makes us look less like reasonable people and more like rabid dogs, ready to bite anyone who walks by.
It's far better to promise coexistence than threaten extinction.
I doubt it was modded down because it was censored.
More like it was modded down because it was stupid. Let's do the numbers:
90% Windows
5% Linux
5% Apple
(These are the last numbers I saw - but I doubt they've changed much.)
If you could develop a product to sell to 90% of the world's computer users, would you let some silly platform bias get in the way of that? Hell no, you'd go for the big money. Software development isn't cheap, and you need to sell to the most people in order to recoup your costs.
It doesn't matter if you're technically savvy. If you're financially savvy, you're writing for Windows. Sorry, the situation does suck (I'd like to see software written for all platforms, but there's no money in that), but we're stuck with it.
You do have a point that there are dissenting posters on/., but you have to admit that there is a collective opinion, and that it is more than inclined to contradict itself whenever it suits its purposes.
And I have a fair grasp of software licensing. The GPL is designed to be viral. If it wasn't, there'd be no need for a non-viral (LGPL) version.
Even I, arguably the staunchest of MS supporters on/., think this is bad juju.
Perhaps if this were a standard with a publicly maintained content list, I'd be cool with this. But as it stands, it's not quite right, and technically, under the constitution, it's prior restraint (since the content is altered before it is seen by the client).
In MS's defense, my mouth is watering at the potential for this on a corporate Intranet, which is where I thought the technology was originally intended to go, with Office XP's new Intranet features. But on the Internet, it's just not right.
I'll keep using IE and all, but I think I'll avoid any of these Smart Tags on the Internet.
Why bother making it illegal? The government would probably like it if we were zonked out half the time - makes us easier to control. Parents would kill to be able to zombify their children, corporations will be fighting each other to control their audience, and the government will get rich off the taxes.
As long as they can keep it out of the workplace, no one will have a problem with this. Perhaps they'll ban headphones.
I'm pretty sure that the whole board is using a unified driver, so they might not want to open it up after all... check socketa.com's review for more info.
If they don't open the video driver, they can't open the video++ driver...
Joe Schmoe doesn't care about the politics of the situation; he just wants music, as cheap as he can get it.
Sorry, but the dedication to ideals required for this is only found in people with the knowledge of the situation and the desire to correct it. The average person has neither.
Slashdot Mirror
In ten years, we'll be using something we haven't even thought of.
Ten years ago we were all running DOS. Look now. No one even remembers DOS (even though it's still there.)
MS, Linux, MacOS, BeOS,... they're all going to get slaughtered. By what, I don't know. If I did, I'd be buying stock.
Does Outlook Express even support connecting to an Exchange server?
... but what's wrong with MS trying to get its revenue for software that they paid to develop?
If you're not pirating software, don't worry about it. In fact, tell them so. If you're not sure, shame on you. Keep better records. And if you're pirating, stop using that software. The rest of us had to pay for it.
(Note that this only applies to businesses. I have my own opinions about consumer software pricing and licensing, and rather like the way Oracle does it, i.e. free for non-commercial use.)
There's nothing wrong with free alternatives. But if you're running a business off of an MS solution, you owe them for as long as you've been doing so. If you don't like it, get away from it - no one's twisting your arm, and there are alternatives available.
It'd be interesting to hear his thoughts on the matter.
God were those awful. You know it's time to quit when all three games together are going for 25 at Best Buy.
... to buy a PS2 just for this and A-Spec.
But two games does not a system make (well, not a $300 system anyway.)
There's an excellent update on the Reg explaining the concept of these unsolicited cease and desist letters, incl. the German legal stance on them. Check it out.
Let's assume there won't be a price drop. We already shoulder the cost of piracy in CD's, or so they claim. Therefore, not dropping the price is an admission of one of two things:
1. The copy protection scheme is ineffective.
2. They've been lying about the costs of piracy to extract more money out of us.
Look at the article. All they did was put virtual scratches into the CD and make sure they screwed up the ECC as well.
If anything, I think it's time we put some effort into the scratch-removal parts of MP3 rippers, and that such effort would have the secondary benefit of clearing this little mess up as well.
I wonder, however - what effect would this have on the durability of CD's? If it's already got a virtual defect in it, would it be more susceptible to skipping due to a physical media defect?
Was I really the only one who got this joke?
Granted, it wasn't that funny, but it wasn't that obscure either.
Wasn't he just commenting about the attitude of certain OSS proponents painting the remainder of us in a bad light?
I somehow feel we'd be best off if some of the more reasonable and eloquent members of our community got together to deal with the corporate world; sort of a OSS PR department, if you will.
If you want companies to work with us, you might not want to paint us as a threat to intellectual property (yes, there is such a thing, and yes, it's overapplied nowadays.) Telling people we won't play nice makes us look less like reasonable people and more like rabid dogs, ready to bite anyone who walks by.
It's far better to promise coexistence than threaten extinction.
If they could use this to unlink goatse, I'd be happier than a pig in shit.
I doubt it was modded down because it was censored.
More like it was modded down because it was stupid. Let's do the numbers:
90% Windows
5% Linux
5% Apple
(These are the last numbers I saw - but I doubt they've changed much.)
If you could develop a product to sell to 90% of the world's computer users, would you let some silly platform bias get in the way of that? Hell no, you'd go for the big money. Software development isn't cheap, and you need to sell to the most people in order to recoup your costs.
It doesn't matter if you're technically savvy. If you're financially savvy, you're writing for Windows. Sorry, the situation does suck (I'd like to see software written for all platforms, but there's no money in that), but we're stuck with it.
They don't specify the OS, merely that they're replacing Applix on UNIX machines.
These could be going on Solaris terminals, or even Windows machines.
Either way, though, it'll help StarOffice development.
You do have a point that there are dissenting posters on /., but you have to admit that there is a collective opinion, and that it is more than inclined to contradict itself whenever it suits its purposes.
And I have a fair grasp of software licensing. The GPL is designed to be viral. If it wasn't, there'd be no need for a non-viral (LGPL) version.
I love how /. insists that the GPL has tainted Caldera, but that MS is lying when they say that the GPL taints codebases.
Make up your mind...
... The stuff that works and the stuff that doesn't.
Every piece of fiber out there is the first kind. All the stuff that doesn't work, well, that's what a QC department is for.
Even I, arguably the staunchest of MS supporters on /., think this is bad juju.
Perhaps if this were a standard with a publicly maintained content list, I'd be cool with this. But as it stands, it's not quite right, and technically, under the constitution, it's prior restraint (since the content is altered before it is seen by the client).
In MS's defense, my mouth is watering at the potential for this on a corporate Intranet, which is where I thought the technology was originally intended to go, with Office XP's new Intranet features. But on the Internet, it's just not right.
I'll keep using IE and all, but I think I'll avoid any of these Smart Tags on the Internet.
Nothing wrong with a smartass. Takes one to know one. Personally, I don't even know the guy and I kind of like him for this.
The end most certainly justifies the means. Besides, there's nothing wrong with dragging the DMCA through the mud in two courts.
So you'd skip out on best-of-breed functionality just because of some paranoid objection to Ms being a successful business?
Pure blind zealotry. This makes no sense to me whatsoever.
Use what's best, pure and simple. Nothing else matters.
Why bother making it illegal? The government would probably like it if we were zonked out half the time - makes us easier to control. Parents would kill to be able to zombify their children, corporations will be fighting each other to control their audience, and the government will get rich off the taxes.
As long as they can keep it out of the workplace, no one will have a problem with this. Perhaps they'll ban headphones.
And it'll run 55% faster than on Linux, right?
I'm pretty sure that the whole board is using a unified driver, so they might not want to open it up after all... check socketa.com's review for more info.
If they don't open the video driver, they can't open the video++ driver...
It was going to be directed by Jay Roach, who I think could handle it just fine. The only catch was that the producers wanted some star power.
Here's hoping we get Bruce Campbell as Zaphod.
Nope.
Joe Schmoe doesn't care about the politics of the situation; he just wants music, as cheap as he can get it.
Sorry, but the dedication to ideals required for this is only found in people with the knowledge of the situation and the desire to correct it. The average person has neither.