I wonder if they took into account the possibility of users switching away to another free *NIX.
I wonder what SCO has to do that people stop believing them.
"Hey, we have proof that IBM violated our IP, honest!"
"Hey, we have proof that we own all versions of Unix, honest!"
"Hey, we have proof that Linux is just a modified version of Unix, honest!"
"Hey, we pay you a lot of money if you migrate away from Linux, honest!"
Seriously: I think all the "Hey, I'll migrate to FreeBSD and stick it to the man" people here should cancel their E-Mail account immediately because they are in very serious danger of falling for Nigeran scam.
tehdely, when Darl McBride says he wants to launder 10 million, you get 20% and 10% are for "expenses in the transaction", would you also believe it?
Can I build fast, non-scripted, closed source apps for KDE like I can for GNOME? Or do I still have to pay the 4 digit price tag for a commerical QT DEV license?
If you want to sell software and can't afford a 4 digit price tag, you better try some other business.
For OSS and closed-source in-house applications, the GPL-version of Qt is just fine.
The funny thing is that RMS himself was stating that gradually the LGPL libraries should be replaced by GPL-ones. Now all of the sudden the evangelists are concerned about closed source apps and say the GPL for libraries is evil-evil-evil, could you please make up your mind?
I'm sure if any one of us had 40Bn cash and 8 years [..] we could...
Of course they could, but why should they care?
The only solution is to stop using Outlook or better stop using Windows altogether. While the latter might be not possible (Win32-only apps) the former certainly is.
The point is Motorolas commitment to Linux - or lack of such. Seems to me they put Linux cold on ice, in benefit of MS.
That doesn't make any sense. Why did they release a Linux-cellphone in the first place, then?
And Symbian is not off-topic because it's the clear market-leader.
The point is that the usual Microsoft-tactic is not working: Dumping to get market domination will not happen because Nokia is dominating the market and not Motorola.
So either Microsoft has to constantly pour money into Windows-cellphones to make them competitive with Symbian (Symbian has much more sold units, therefore much lower costs per unit. Symbian has also much more users so network effects make it more useful than Windows, too.). As soon as Microsoft stops pouring money into it, it dies immedeately.
Actually pretty similar to the XBox which is also behaving like a comatose patient that cannot survive on its own and will die the moment somebody pulls the plug. - But at least the XBox has captured some marketshare (only half of what Microsoft has planned, but of course they don't admit that. XBox is a great success in the press-releases) so Microsoft might even stick to it even though they will never see their money again. Windows-cellphones on the other hand haven't captured any real marketshare at all. It's very risky to invest into Windows-smartphones because Microsoft will sooner or later want to stop losing money on it. Which will either mean large royalties or a complete end of the project.
Microsoft has already shown that they don't give a shit about unsupported ex-customers. Microsoft smartphones can become unsupported doorstoppers anytime.
Also when you look at the Orange-shop, the first cellphone is the Treo 600 with lots of Nokias on the first page. The Orange SVP is not even on the first page anymore.
Microsoft is able to make some isolated deals with some networks, but the vast majority of networks don't even offer them and those who still do are not marketing them.
A weird looking Linux phone versus a good looking Windows phone.
Let me get that straight: You think that Linux is doomed and Windows is going to take over because you personally don't like one model and like another one? You realize that cellphones are redesigned almost yearly?
So what if somebody at Motorola gets the idea to throw out your beloved Windows and put Linux into the same casing to save royalties? What will your excuse be then? I already know: You will claim the Linux version will be "too hard to use".
Anyway, that's pointless. A single model doesn't matter, it's how the platform as a whole behaves.
Perhaps they wanted the MS phone to succeed more than they wanted the Linux phone to succeed.
Bullshit, they wanted to cut costs. Since usually the lid just displays the date or simple calls, somebody @ Motorola got the idea to just put in a glass and display it on the main display. I actually happen to posess a Treo 270 which also has a transparent lid. Motorola just loves lids, some people do too, others don't.
You are either stupid or trolling
Who is trolling? Who is refusing to get to the point and drags the discussion out about pointless casing designs?
The point is that Symbian offers being established and Linux offers investment safety (not being dependent on a 3rd party) and royalty-freeness. Windows offers neither. Maybe MS is paying Motorola to "get a foot into the market", but that won't help them in the long run. In the long run a platform has to be able to support itself which Windows on smartphones is absolutely unable to do.
I've already wrote that 3 times, yet you ignored the main point everytime. If I'm stupid and you are not able to counter my arguments then this actually reflects very badly on your own intelligence.
OK, so it's 1:1 in the Linux vs. Microsoft battle at Motorola. However Linux has one advantage: No royalties, so Motorola can have a lower price and a higher margin on it. How long will it take a manager at Motorola to figure that out? I mean there are no "switching costs" associated with Linux here. They have working solutions on both platforms and both platforms are outsiders in the marketplace, so there is not much going for MS compared to Linux.
BTW: I'm no MS fan.
Yeah, sure. That's why you called the Linux phone doomed because it's a clamshell, yet you think the MS-phone (which is also a clamshell) is going to set the world on fire.
You are either a compulsive pessimist or a MS-fan/shareholder/employee/supporter posing as a MS-critic.
Symbian offers the advantage of the platform: People can share ring-tones, send MMS and share games and applications across their Symbian-phones. It also offers the advantage that it's established in the marketplace and people already know it. Symbian like Windows on the desktop. Linux offers the advantage that it's royalty free which may or may not turn the market around.
However Microsoft doesn't offer any advantage at all. It has the disadvantages of Symbian (royalties) combined with the disadvantages of Linux (not established). It's like OS/2 on the desktop. Actually it's very much like OS/2 on the desktop, because new MS-phones don't even get in the news anymore. Nobody cares. Everybody has already seen it before and it didn't work out. Linux-phones are now coming and get into the news and will get their chance in the next 2 years.
And Motorola hardly pulled the press release I mentioned, only mis-linked it.
I said they pulled the press release and forgot a swedish version on the server. What part of that don't you understand?
Believing the MS's mobile initiative to be dead is dangerous and way wrong.
Only dangerous for Microsoft. Without the "it's going to be THE STANDARD" - bonus, they don't have a chance.
Microsofts problem has partly been their technology - now polished - but more problematic was their lack of support amongst mobile tech producers.
I disagree on the first part (MS has still to show that they can actually put out a working smartphone solution) but you are correct on the second part: They lack support - again because everybody (rightly) believes that MS-smartphones are dead. It's a self-fullfilling prophecy. No support -> Everybody believes it's dead -> even less support -> It is dead.
A well reputed company like Motorola turning to Windows is exactly what they needed.
You don't find it ironic if you type that line in a story about a REAL EXISTING **LINUX** smartphone while there is nothing but hot air and vapor about MS-smartphones from Motorola?
Face it: MS-smartphones are dead. Symbian is the standard and has the advantages of being established (you get tons of programs, support and all formats are working), Linux has the advantage of being royalty-free and source-free, Microsoft has no advantages: It comes with royalties like Symbian and is as badly established as Linux. And on top you get the additional disadvantage that it's price and existance is uncertain. (Symbian is controlled by a consortium, not a single firm)
As interesting as the A760 might be, Linux is a complete outsider in mobile technology.
Just like Windows. But it's royalty free.
No wonder Motorola loudly bet on the safest horse.
You sure read too many Microsoft propaganda. With about 0% marketshare, Windows is no safety horse in cellphones, it's a risky technology that can dissappear anyday, just like:
Hailstorm
Windows/Alpha
Blackbird
MS Bob
or many other Microsoft projects
Because of Microsoft marketing you think otherwise, but in the real world Microsoft has a long list of shutting down projects without warning.
If all you have is a swedish press-release, well then I'm really sorry for you and your beloved Windows-cellphones.
Why is it that MS-phones are always announced and never materialize?
Orange had a phone for a short time that was so buggy that they had to remove it from the market. T-Online stopped their MS-plans shortly before it would go to market. And now Motorola pulls the press releases about MS-phones - except for a swedish one which seems to have been forgotten on the server...
What tops it off is that there are still people stupid/naive enougth to preach that "There are, however, very explicit plans for further development of MS-based devices", when "Eventually Motorola plans to use Linux in most of its phones." (See above with nice linkage).
Microsoft on cellphones is dead. With better established commercial alternatives (Symbian and PalmOS) and equally established free alternatives (Linux) available, there is nothing which can revive Windows on cellphones. It had a chance, but blew it. Get used to it.
I find it still hard to believe that people still fall for this. I mean that spam surely wasn't the only one he was getting, I get about 3 spams from army generals, nigerian queens or whatever. If you are really naive, OK you may fall for it, but if you get tens of these, you should really see through it.
It is sad, we have arrived in a day and age where it seems as though every new technology that comes around the block needs to make it big in the first couple years , or it is considered a failure.
The first tablets were around in the early 90's so I don't think it's still in "the first couple years".
Actually, you can also fire up Konqueror and type "man:printf" into it to get a nice colorized version with links to other manpages in the "see also" section.
Can you come up with a single example of when somebody was harmed because of cookies?
Anyway do yourself (and your gf) a favor and just turn off the cookie-paranoia.
BTW, most people I've shown Mozilla were very impressed with tabbed browsing, it's definitly a feature a lot (of course not all, but definitely many non-techies) like.
Actually that's not the key. I think IE loses the browser domination the day Sony ships the Playstation 3 (with a non-IE browser, which will probably be Mozilla).
Also Internet-aware cellphones (many of those use opera), IE's constant flow of security issues and complete lack of development and of course Linux desktop inroads especially in governments will contribute to the erosion of IE domination.
In 3-4 years, IE will still make up the majority of hits, but the remainder will be far too large to ignore.
Honestly I don't see "branding Mozilla" influencing that developments in any way, although it sure can't hurt...
SCO has not (and will not) sued anybody over Linux or the GPL.
What they did is sue IBM for "stealing" IP. Wherever IBM put the "stolen" IP, is irrelevant, so the SCO-claims against IBM and their case has nothing to do with Linux itself.
In theory SCO could just use the same claims against AIX, however only anti-Linux rethoric will get you license-money from Redmond...
First of all, you must have overseen that a lot of companies block all.doc/.xls/.exe attachements because of viruses. Yes, they do and did so for several years by now.
Then, you must have overlooked that there are lots of interoperability problems withing MS Word itself. How often have I heard "I can't read that, please resend it in Word97 format", I don't think that saying "I can't read that, please resend it in rtf-format" will cause any more problems. Actually OpenOffice will cause less problems because you can upgrade much easier and faster and therefore can read the new format probably a long way before the budget for the new Office would be approved.
I have a Treo 270 and the voice quality is good. The Treo 270 has these problems though:
They made a terrible way to connect the SIM-card. It's unreliable and easy to lose the SIM card. (The Treo-600 comes with a slot like most phones so that is fixed, thank god)
According to some users sooner or later the wires running to the speaker in the flip cover will fail, haven't hit me yet, though. (Without flip-cover that obviously can't happen with the Treo-600 either)
The last-callers-list is not easily reachable, which is annoying. (The telephony part of the Treo is said to be reworked, I don't know wether it improved or not)
All in all, I'm still very happy with my Treo, it's the all-in-one device that is small enough to fit in the pocket and with the Treo600 fixing most of the quirks, I'm surely getting one of those next year.
Although I like the flip cover. You can talk for 45 Minutes without problems when with other phones the phone (and your ear) gets uncomfortably hot. But the smaller size and the robustness (any moving part is something that easily breaks) are good arguments to remove the flip cover, though.
I personally think the tester did exactly the right thing: Use the defaults that come with the distribution/installation because that's exactly what almost all users are going to use in the real world.
If there is something wrong with the settings, then the project should reset the defaults to sane values, rerun the benchmarks (all the programs are there) and ask the tester to confirm and/or publish them.
Isn't it funny that the Microsoft bootlick- sorry advocates have that extreme double standard going on?
They have no trouble pretending to believe that SCO's claims are true, even though every single bit of "evidence" turned out to be just hot air. But on the other hand they demand evidence of everything Microsoft does but refuses to admit.
Microsoft has already given SCO money publicly (for their "Unix"-license), then "an anonymous company" gave SCO money for their "Linux-antidote" license, wonder what company that was... - and now again an anonymous company pays SCO money through a fund in which Microsoft and Microsoft-related Vulcan are big players.
Why all this secrecy? Why doesn't SCO show their evidence? Why does every investor in SCO want to remain anonymous?
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder what SCO has to do that people stop believing them.
"Hey, we have proof that IBM violated our IP, honest!"
"Hey, we have proof that we own all versions of Unix, honest!"
"Hey, we have proof that Linux is just a modified version of Unix, honest!"
"Hey, we pay you a lot of money if you migrate away from Linux, honest!"
Seriously: I think all the "Hey, I'll migrate to FreeBSD and stick it to the man" people here should cancel their E-Mail account immediately because they are in very serious danger of falling for Nigeran scam.
tehdely, when Darl McBride says he wants to launder 10 million, you get 20% and 10% are for "expenses in the transaction", would you also believe it?
If you want to sell software and can't afford a 4 digit price tag, you better try some other business.
For OSS and closed-source in-house applications, the GPL-version of Qt is just fine.
The funny thing is that RMS himself was stating that gradually the LGPL libraries should be replaced by GPL-ones. Now all of the sudden the evangelists are concerned about closed source apps and say the GPL for libraries is evil-evil-evil, could you please make up your mind?
Of course they could, but why should they care?
The only solution is to stop using Outlook or better stop using Windows altogether. While the latter might be not possible (Win32-only apps) the former certainly is.
That doesn't make any sense. Why did they release a Linux-cellphone in the first place, then?
And Symbian is not off-topic because it's the clear market-leader.
The point is that the usual Microsoft-tactic is not working: Dumping to get market domination will not happen because Nokia is dominating the market and not Motorola.
So either Microsoft has to constantly pour money into Windows-cellphones to make them competitive with Symbian (Symbian has much more sold units, therefore much lower costs per unit. Symbian has also much more users so network effects make it more useful than Windows, too.). As soon as Microsoft stops pouring money into it, it dies immedeately.
Actually pretty similar to the XBox which is also behaving like a comatose patient that cannot survive on its own and will die the moment somebody pulls the plug. - But at least the XBox has captured some marketshare (only half of what Microsoft has planned, but of course they don't admit that. XBox is a great success in the press-releases) so Microsoft might even stick to it even though they will never see their money again. Windows-cellphones on the other hand haven't captured any real marketshare at all. It's very risky to invest into Windows-smartphones because Microsoft will sooner or later want to stop losing money on it. Which will either mean large royalties or a complete end of the project.
Microsoft has already shown that they don't give a shit about unsupported ex-customers. Microsoft smartphones can become unsupported doorstoppers anytime.
Also Orange is the only one carrying these phones (thus the name) and Orange is just one network among many in the UK.
Look here
Also when you look at the Orange-shop, the first cellphone is the Treo 600 with lots of Nokias on the first page. The Orange SVP is not even on the first page anymore.
Microsoft is able to make some isolated deals with some networks, but the vast majority of networks don't even offer them and those who still do are not marketing them.
Let me get that straight: You think that Linux is doomed and Windows is going to take over because you personally don't like one model and like another one? You realize that cellphones are redesigned almost yearly?
So what if somebody at Motorola gets the idea to throw out your beloved Windows and put Linux into the same casing to save royalties? What will your excuse be then? I already know: You will claim the Linux version will be "too hard to use".
Anyway, that's pointless. A single model doesn't matter, it's how the platform as a whole behaves.
Perhaps they wanted the MS phone to succeed more than they wanted the Linux phone to succeed.
Bullshit, they wanted to cut costs. Since usually the lid just displays the date or simple calls, somebody @ Motorola got the idea to just put in a glass and display it on the main display. I actually happen to posess a Treo 270 which also has a transparent lid. Motorola just loves lids, some people do too, others don't.
You are either stupid or trolling
Who is trolling? Who is refusing to get to the point and drags the discussion out about pointless casing designs?
The point is that Symbian offers being established and Linux offers investment safety (not being dependent on a 3rd party) and royalty-freeness. Windows offers neither. Maybe MS is paying Motorola to "get a foot into the market", but that won't help them in the long run. In the long run a platform has to be able to support itself which Windows on smartphones is absolutely unable to do.
I've already wrote that 3 times, yet you ignored the main point everytime. If I'm stupid and you are not able to counter my arguments then this actually reflects very badly on your own intelligence.
BTW: I'm no MS fan.
Yeah, sure. That's why you called the Linux phone doomed because it's a clamshell, yet you think the MS-phone (which is also a clamshell) is going to set the world on fire.
You are either a compulsive pessimist or a MS-fan/shareholder/employee/supporter posing as a MS-critic.
Symbian offers the advantage of the platform: People can share ring-tones, send MMS and share games and applications across their Symbian-phones. It also offers the advantage that it's established in the marketplace and people already know it. Symbian like Windows on the desktop. Linux offers the advantage that it's royalty free which may or may not turn the market around.
However Microsoft doesn't offer any advantage at all. It has the disadvantages of Symbian (royalties) combined with the disadvantages of Linux (not established). It's like OS/2 on the desktop. Actually it's very much like OS/2 on the desktop, because new MS-phones don't even get in the news anymore. Nobody cares. Everybody has already seen it before and it didn't work out. Linux-phones are now coming and get into the news and will get their chance in the next 2 years.
The battle will be Symbian vs. Linux
I said they pulled the press release and forgot a swedish version on the server. What part of that don't you understand?
Believing the MS's mobile initiative to be dead is dangerous and way wrong.
Only dangerous for Microsoft. Without the "it's going to be THE STANDARD" - bonus, they don't have a chance.
Microsofts problem has partly been their technology - now polished - but more problematic was their lack of support amongst mobile tech producers.
I disagree on the first part (MS has still to show that they can actually put out a working smartphone solution) but you are correct on the second part: They lack support - again because everybody (rightly) believes that MS-smartphones are dead. It's a self-fullfilling prophecy. No support -> Everybody believes it's dead -> even less support -> It is dead.
A well reputed company like Motorola turning to Windows is exactly what they needed.
You don't find it ironic if you type that line in a story about a REAL EXISTING **LINUX** smartphone while there is nothing but hot air and vapor about MS-smartphones from Motorola?
Face it: MS-smartphones are dead. Symbian is the standard and has the advantages of being established (you get tons of programs, support and all formats are working), Linux has the advantage of being royalty-free and source-free, Microsoft has no advantages: It comes with royalties like Symbian and is as badly established as Linux. And on top you get the additional disadvantage that it's price and existance is uncertain. (Symbian is controlled by a consortium, not a single firm)
As interesting as the A760 might be, Linux is a complete outsider in mobile technology.
Just like Windows. But it's royalty free.
No wonder Motorola loudly bet on the safest horse.
You sure read too many Microsoft propaganda. With about 0% marketshare, Windows is no safety horse in cellphones, it's a risky technology that can dissappear anyday, just like:
Because of Microsoft marketing you think otherwise, but in the real world Microsoft has a long list of shutting down projects without warning.
If all you have is a swedish press-release, well then I'm really sorry for you and your beloved Windows-cellphones.
Orange had a phone for a short time that was so buggy that they had to remove it from the market. T-Online stopped their MS-plans shortly before it would go to market. And now Motorola pulls the press releases about MS-phones - except for a swedish one which seems to have been forgotten on the server...
What tops it off is that there are still people stupid/naive enougth to preach that "There are, however, very explicit plans for further development of MS-based devices", when "Eventually Motorola plans to use Linux in most of its phones." (See above with nice linkage).
Microsoft on cellphones is dead. With better established commercial alternatives (Symbian and PalmOS) and equally established free alternatives (Linux) available, there is nothing which can revive Windows on cellphones. It had a chance, but blew it. Get used to it.
I find it still hard to believe that people still fall for this. I mean that spam surely wasn't the only one he was getting, I get about 3 spams from army generals, nigerian queens or whatever. If you are really naive, OK you may fall for it, but if you get tens of these, you should really see through it.
Pah, forget it. I've got much better offers than that already.
Actually, there are lots of automobile clubs.
The first tablets were around in the early 90's so I don't think it's still in "the first couple years".
Actually, you can also fire up Konqueror and type "man:printf" into it to get a nice colorized version with links to other manpages in the "see also" section.
Please post a link to that extension!
Anyway do yourself (and your gf) a favor and just turn off the cookie-paranoia.
BTW, most people I've shown Mozilla were very impressed with tabbed browsing, it's definitly a feature a lot (of course not all, but definitely many non-techies) like.
Also Internet-aware cellphones (many of those use opera), IE's constant flow of security issues and complete lack of development and of course Linux desktop inroads especially in governments will contribute to the erosion of IE domination.
In 3-4 years, IE will still make up the majority of hits, but the remainder will be far too large to ignore.
Honestly I don't see "branding Mozilla" influencing that developments in any way, although it sure can't hurt...
They know that they can't win any lawsuit against Linux users, that's why they don't sue.
SCO has not (and will not) sued anybody over Linux or the GPL.
What they did is sue IBM for "stealing" IP. Wherever IBM put the "stolen" IP, is irrelevant, so the SCO-claims against IBM and their case has nothing to do with Linux itself.
In theory SCO could just use the same claims against AIX, however only anti-Linux rethoric will get you license-money from Redmond...
Some cynics say that e-voting will make incidents like in Florida2000 impossible. - But only because no election fraud can ever be proven.
And now tell me where the real zealots are.
You sure are.
First of all, you must have overseen that a lot of companies block all .doc/.xls/.exe attachements because of viruses. Yes, they do and did so for several years by now.
Then, you must have overlooked that there are lots of interoperability problems withing MS Word itself. How often have I heard "I can't read that, please resend it in Word97 format", I don't think that saying "I can't read that, please resend it in rtf-format" will cause any more problems. Actually OpenOffice will cause less problems because you can upgrade much easier and faster and therefore can read the new format probably a long way before the budget for the new Office would be approved.
All in all, I'm still very happy with my Treo, it's the all-in-one device that is small enough to fit in the pocket and with the Treo600 fixing most of the quirks, I'm surely getting one of those next year.
Although I like the flip cover. You can talk for 45 Minutes without problems when with other phones the phone (and your ear) gets uncomfortably hot. But the smaller size and the robustness (any moving part is something that easily breaks) are good arguments to remove the flip cover, though.
If there is something wrong with the settings, then the project should reset the defaults to sane values, rerun the benchmarks (all the programs are there) and ask the tester to confirm and/or publish them.
They have no trouble pretending to believe that SCO's claims are true, even though every single bit of "evidence" turned out to be just hot air. But on the other hand they demand evidence of everything Microsoft does but refuses to admit.
Microsoft has already given SCO money publicly (for their "Unix"-license), then "an anonymous company" gave SCO money for their "Linux-antidote" license, wonder what company that was... - and now again an anonymous company pays SCO money through a fund in which Microsoft and Microsoft-related Vulcan are big players.
Why all this secrecy? Why doesn't SCO show their evidence? Why does every investor in SCO want to remain anonymous?
Questions "Overly Critical Guy" surely can't answer.