just about as soon as you can get the MSOfficeAssistant on KDE. As far as I know, Microsoft still hasn't released Office for Linux, though I could be wrong.
Are you saying that I lose, or are you saying that the anti-Microsoft advocates lose? Because there may be a big difference. If you had read my entire post, you would possibly understand my entire point, that the code that is at issue is not the current source, but instead the old 9x source. So, if Microsoft is forced to release their source code, the judge cannot reasonably demand the NT code, because they were not sued because of that code. If the states want to get the NT code, they have to sue again, and MS can work during that time to produce and release a new codebase.
I don't know what planet you're from, or why you think it is acceptable to be so biased, but Microsoft wins. For good or bad, regardless.
The story fails to mention what for what OS the source has been demanded. Reading the other comments here at Slashdot leads me to believe that most of you assume that they will release the source for Windows 3.1, and hand it over with an unconcealed snicker on their sneaky, rich faces. The rest of you, evidently, assume that they will have to turn over the code for Windows 2000, or even XP (note the comment someone had which placed the kernel32.dll in the \winnt\system32 folder). This is definitely not the case. From the beginning of this case, Microsoft has been very careful to keep their NT codebase off-limits from investigation. The entire argument that is, and has always been, going on is based entirely on Windows 98. I don't know how many people still use Windows 98, but it is a satisfyingly small number, and you can't even get a new computer with 98 still installed.
If I were Microsoft, I would agree to releasing the source code, because the most advanced OS the judge can force MS to hand over is Windows 98SE, which is years out of date.
Microsoft succeeded in this case, because they have completely moved away from the codebase the argument is based on, which they were planning to do anyway, and no judge can legally demand that MS release any code that came from the NT codebase. It is 9x at best, which is completely useless to everyone.
Best case scenario: the states prove that it is possible to remove Internet Explorer from Windows 98 (the code given them), without wrecking the OS. Judge says: "See, Bill? Change it." Bill G. replies: "Oh, I see how it's done now! Okay, I'll change it." So he goes back to Redmond and removes IE from 98, and they give that back at the deadline, which will of course be too much time (MS obviously already knows how to do it). The judge sees it and approves, and forces Microsoft to sell that version of Windows to the public as a watered-down version of Windows. Microsoft submits, and releases Windows 98 Light to the public, which is basically Windows 98 without anything good attached to it. When no copies sell, MS shrugs and says: "See, no one wants a dumbed down version of Windows," but the states say "Wait a second, that's the old version, of course nobody's buying it! I'm suing them for XP!!!" But the judge agrees with Microsoft that the NT/2K/XP codebase was never part of the argument, so the litigation must start all over again.
We go through a few years worth of court cases again, while MS fervently works out a whole new codebase. When the states finally get them to release the NT code, they release the code to XP Home Edition at the same time as they release their newest OS, based on a completely new codebase.
Repeat as necessary, ad nauseam, to infinity, et cetera.
Microsoft cannot lose in court, in fact they may have already won. If you want to beat them, you need to release a product that goes faster, crashes less, and has complete binary compatibility with Windows, or else the mass public will not make the switch. And if you had these features, why would the public switch, if they are only buying another Windows?
Thus, Microsoft wins. They can do nothing but win. Sorry, fellas.
Are you mad? You can't just send the Federal Marhals in to take whatever you want! This isn't a drug-bust on the multibillion dollar scale, and they didn't even take these kind of measures against Enron.
Come on guys, you have to obey the law, even if you believe in Open Source. And, similarly, if you are an idiot.
I don't remember a keyboard, but I think another model might have had small keyboard you strap to your forearm.
While that might excite the anime fans out there, it isn't very useful to the power user, as it virtually guarantees that you can use only one hand. What might be a better idea for a keyboard is a wireless little thing (with full-sized keys) that can be used with one hand and held in the other, or set on the lap to be used with both hands. If that were the case, however, you would have to have some other way to attach it to your person for the probably frequent occasions you are not using it.
The point of a machine like this is to be able to use a computer anywhere, at any time, without having to worry about carrying it or going back to your desktop. If you are going to use it for a few hours, you might as well be at your desk.
On a lighter note, can you imagine these things used in conjunction with the Segway Human Transporter? People whizzing around thoughtlessly on twowheeled machines with more distracting machines attached to their faces, paying little attention to each other, except to swear in bewildered surprise when some "obnoxious punk kid" crashes into them because they weren't paying attention.
It will bring a whole new aspect to the arguments over distractions at the wheel.
How is this different from a different organ - the kidney - being replaced with external machinery (dialysis)?
How is this different from the prosthetic limbs or the artifical hearts in development?
Hmmm, that's tough. Oh wait, I remember what the difference is: It's a whole life, not just an organ that facilitates life. Many people have difficulty justifying that a person can be a full human being if they were not born from a human. This reservation creates problems in the case of "test-tube" babies, but I'm sure you can see the problems that can come of a human baby born from a machine. Is this person capable of becoming a full human being? It is obviously a person, but can you justify that it is the same as everyone else if it cannot be reasonably tied to a true father and mother?
This could lead to a Huxley-an society of parentless drones, which, if any of you have ever read Brave New World, you know how disturbing this kind of thing can be.
We should be careful to limit things before they can be used by an unfriendly element of the population to do massive harm to another.
Maybe they made a mistake in the measurements, and as they graphed the rotation of the galaxy time was actually going backwards in their simulation. That would yield the results we see now, in a much more humorous (in a slap-yourself-in-the-face kind of) way.
The error rate will grow exponatially with the number of songs, because statisically more song will be phoneticly more equal, the more you add. (bad way to say it, but you prob get the point)
The belief in the possibility of one thing that one does not know does not proclaim one guilty of believing every single cockamamie conspiracy theory every wack-job with $20, a coffee and a legal pad has ever come up with.
Outright denial of a possibility is a sign of not only idiocy, but if imbecility.
Maybe something like this is happening again. The power shortages all over the country, especially in the West. Enron trying to fix prices with the government, almost as if they were absolutely positive there would be a huge demand for power in that area. Is the US government building a new type of facility or researching a new type of weapon that will once again revolutionize warfare as the nuclear bomb did 55 years ago?
Terrifying to think about. Is it possible to revolutionize the art of killing the much ever again?
okay, everyone who doesn't hate the hell out of george w. bush: raise your damn hand. this guy's a complete dope, and has yet to do anything right in office. impeach!
What if the XBOX doesn't fail? You failed to consider this possibility, and according to your entire (mostly meaningless) statement, it is a major factor. You can never just assume that something will or won't make it in a country. It is, after all, a whole country. Be a little less of an ass next time you open it.
Form of convincing youth to be more moral?
on
Space Tourist Standards
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
This could be a ploy by NASA to try to convince teenagers not to drink, lie or cheat if they want to be an astronaut. I don't know how well it would work, because most youth don't want to be astronauts right now, but it isn't a bad idea.
Just thought I'd submit this possibility for consideration.
But if you had a program such as this on your Windows machine, someone would think of a way to incorporate it into an email worm and activate it remotely. Something like this could send all your personal data to someone you don't even know, and without you even knowing about it. If a program like this is ever written, it would be a major security risk to any Windows user.
Possibly even more of a security risk than Outlook. Mmmm, maybe not.
Every other type of stem cell except for the Embryonic Stem Cell (ESC) exhibits rapid aging. By rapid, they mean hours to days before the entire cell line is dead (in culture). These cells have very short life spans and take a very short time to reproduce. By aging, they mean "unbidden mutation." ESCs don't do this, and apparently neither do these. This is an amazing advancement.
But you're right, the important thing is whether or not these cells can be put into a human (and work). Then we would find out what kind of aging (in the well-known human sense of the word) these cells experience.
Throughout history, the true innovators were rewarded for their knowledge, not penalized for something they didn't really have anything to do with. Poor spending is poor spending, but save the salaries...
I expect to hear from people on my innovators of history part, but bear in mind I said most....
no, they're going to sue for owning a crappy product (netscape), but licensing the best Win32 browser (IE) and bundling it with their service, and then wishing that the best product weren't just SO DAMN MUCH BETTER.
Why do you say that the hardware is being compromised for the OS? This seems like a rather biased viewpoint. If the hardware is optimized for the OS that everyone uses or it is expected that everyone will use with that system, then the hardware company that made the hardware in question did an excellent job bending to the monopoly. That way, they can sell more machines to the consumer, because it comes packaged with Windows XP, and is designed to perform well with it.
Bear in mind that it is possible, of course, to optimize Linux for use with the processor, as it is possible to optimize Linux for every other processor as well, and perhaps the reason AMD decided to optimize the processor for Windows was because Windows cannot be optimized by the user for use with the processor, whereas Linux can be optimized by the user.
Do they plan to try to use their leverage in the internet service provider market to persuade some hardware manufacturers into packaging a different OS into their machines? A new OS based on Linux (so we wouldn't mind), but with an easy-to-use [AOL] interface and only one real way to connect to the internet [AOL](so the average Joe Schmuck could use it). Obviously, AOL would be trying to use a monopoly it wishes it had in order to maneuver itself into a new market. Does anyone else see any possible antitrust implications inherent in this deal?
This is exactly what people blame Microsoft for doing, only in the opposite direction.
If someone were to not feel pain, they would lack the necessary measure of self-preservation which allows us to survive. Pain is feedback that is an integral part of an organism's self-organization.
People ran into this problem when Angeldust was popular years ago: when someone feels invulnerable, they act invulnerable, and when they act invulnerable, they soon discover that they are not, and they get severely injured. Or they die.
I wonder, how can anyone think that windows is "easy to use" compared to MacOS? Or "more reliable"???? At least for the 3.11/95/98 series, which is what we are talking about.
Um, why must we only be talking about Windows up to Windows 98? Everybody thinks that's a piece of crap. If you want to exclude Windows 2000 (in fear), then you say "We are only considering the home computer, because surely those are the only idiots who would use Winbloze!" Well, if you want home systems, what about XP Home? That's a home OS that is at least as stable as Win2k (and anything else on the market), and as easy to use as OS X (maybe).
If you want to complain about marketing departments, bear in mind that Apple also has an excellent marketing department that, despite lacking the vast piles of sheer cash that Microsoft has, instead uses shiny things to attract the attention of the consumer.
Open Source will not be successful among the average user until the coders behind it realize that the average user is incredibly stupid, and that they don't want to spend a lot of time learning your "superior" system, and they are willing to pay an extra few hundred bucks for a system that comes to them easy (they don't have to build it and they don't have to install an OS), and most of all, they hate to be called stupid!! Microsoft and Apple never call their customers lame or dumb or incompetent, and they seem not to care how much better at using their own system than the person to whom they are trying to sell it. Linux has this problem. Suck it up, or go buy an iMac.
i wish they would discontinue the qwerty keyboard, because it basically renders them useless for students who are not rich enough to buy another one. if you can't use it on the test, don't use it anywhere. learn, dammit. and games are worthless.
oh crap- my contradictory views will probably get me killed (again).
Slashdot Mirror
just about as soon as you can get the MSOfficeAssistant on KDE. As far as I know, Microsoft still hasn't released Office for Linux, though I could be wrong.
What would you guys have said if every person at MS had refused to testify in court?
"They are hiding something! They are guilty! Monopoly! Kill Bill!"
But right now everyone at Enron is refusing to testify, and you all say:
"It's a good thing we have so many rights! America rules! What do you mean Enron did something wrong? Innocent until proven guilty!"
Justice means removing your unfounded biases and making reasonable decisions based on facts. Being stupid does not make you right.
Are you saying that I lose, or are you saying that the anti-Microsoft advocates lose? Because there may be a big difference. If you had read my entire post, you would possibly understand my entire point, that the code that is at issue is not the current source, but instead the old 9x source. So, if Microsoft is forced to release their source code, the judge cannot reasonably demand the NT code, because they were not sued because of that code. If the states want to get the NT code, they have to sue again, and MS can work during that time to produce and release a new codebase.
I don't know what planet you're from, or why you think it is acceptable to be so biased, but Microsoft wins. For good or bad, regardless.
The story fails to mention what for what OS the source has been demanded. Reading the other comments here at Slashdot leads me to believe that most of you assume that they will release the source for Windows 3.1, and hand it over with an unconcealed snicker on their sneaky, rich faces. The rest of you, evidently, assume that they will have to turn over the code for Windows 2000, or even XP (note the comment someone had which placed the kernel32.dll in the \winnt\system32 folder). This is definitely not the case. From the beginning of this case, Microsoft has been very careful to keep their NT codebase off-limits from investigation. The entire argument that is, and has always been, going on is based entirely on Windows 98. I don't know how many people still use Windows 98, but it is a satisfyingly small number, and you can't even get a new computer with 98 still installed.
If I were Microsoft, I would agree to releasing the source code, because the most advanced OS the judge can force MS to hand over is Windows 98SE, which is years out of date.
Microsoft succeeded in this case, because they have completely moved away from the codebase the argument is based on, which they were planning to do anyway, and no judge can legally demand that MS release any code that came from the NT codebase. It is 9x at best, which is completely useless to everyone.
Best case scenario: the states prove that it is possible to remove Internet Explorer from Windows 98 (the code given them), without wrecking the OS. Judge says: "See, Bill? Change it." Bill G. replies: "Oh, I see how it's done now! Okay, I'll change it." So he goes back to Redmond and removes IE from 98, and they give that back at the deadline, which will of course be too much time (MS obviously already knows how to do it). The judge sees it and approves, and forces Microsoft to sell that version of Windows to the public as a watered-down version of Windows. Microsoft submits, and releases Windows 98 Light to the public, which is basically Windows 98 without anything good attached to it. When no copies sell, MS shrugs and says: "See, no one wants a dumbed down version of Windows," but the states say "Wait a second, that's the old version, of course nobody's buying it! I'm suing them for XP!!!" But the judge agrees with Microsoft that the NT/2K/XP codebase was never part of the argument, so the litigation must start all over again.
We go through a few years worth of court cases again, while MS fervently works out a whole new codebase. When the states finally get them to release the NT code, they release the code to XP Home Edition at the same time as they release their newest OS, based on a completely new codebase.
Repeat as necessary, ad nauseam, to infinity, et cetera.
Microsoft cannot lose in court, in fact they may have already won. If you want to beat them, you need to release a product that goes faster, crashes less, and has complete binary compatibility with Windows, or else the mass public will not make the switch. And if you had these features, why would the public switch, if they are only buying another Windows?
Thus, Microsoft wins. They can do nothing but win. Sorry, fellas.
Are you mad? You can't just send the Federal Marhals in to take whatever you want! This isn't a drug-bust on the multibillion dollar scale, and they didn't even take these kind of measures against Enron.
Come on guys, you have to obey the law, even if you believe in Open Source. And, similarly, if you are an idiot.
I don't remember a keyboard, but I think another model might have had small keyboard you strap to your forearm.
While that might excite the anime fans out there, it isn't very useful to the power user, as it virtually guarantees that you can use only one hand. What might be a better idea for a keyboard is a wireless little thing (with full-sized keys) that can be used with one hand and held in the other, or set on the lap to be used with both hands. If that were the case, however, you would have to have some other way to attach it to your person for the probably frequent occasions you are not using it.
The point of a machine like this is to be able to use a computer anywhere, at any time, without having to worry about carrying it or going back to your desktop. If you are going to use it for a few hours, you might as well be at your desk.
On a lighter note, can you imagine these things used in conjunction with the Segway Human Transporter? People whizzing around thoughtlessly on twowheeled machines with more distracting machines attached to their faces, paying little attention to each other, except to swear in bewildered surprise when some "obnoxious punk kid" crashes into them because they weren't paying attention.
It will bring a whole new aspect to the arguments over distractions at the wheel.
How is this different from a different organ - the kidney - being replaced with external machinery (dialysis)?
How is this different from the prosthetic limbs or the artifical hearts in development?
Hmmm, that's tough. Oh wait, I remember what the difference is: It's a whole life, not just an organ that facilitates life. Many people have difficulty justifying that a person can be a full human being if they were not born from a human. This reservation creates problems in the case of "test-tube" babies, but I'm sure you can see the problems that can come of a human baby born from a machine. Is this person capable of becoming a full human being? It is obviously a person, but can you justify that it is the same as everyone else if it cannot be reasonably tied to a true father and mother?
This could lead to a Huxley-an society of parentless drones, which, if any of you have ever read Brave New World, you know how disturbing this kind of thing can be.
We should be careful to limit things before they can be used by an unfriendly element of the population to do massive harm to another.
Maybe they made a mistake in the measurements, and as they graphed the rotation of the galaxy time was actually going backwards in their simulation. That would yield the results we see now, in a much more humorous (in a slap-yourself-in-the-face kind of) way.
The error rate will grow exponatially with the number of songs, because statisically more song will be phoneticly more equal, the more you add. (bad way to say it, but you prob get the point)
See sig. Wow.
Here is a comment by one of the MontaVista people addressing this very issue: http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT5152980814. html
Thought this might be interesting.
The belief in the possibility of one thing that one does not know does not proclaim one guilty of believing every single cockamamie conspiracy theory every wack-job with $20, a coffee and a legal pad has ever come up with.
Outright denial of a possibility is a sign of not only idiocy, but if imbecility.
Go back to Moscow.
it required 32% of the US electrical output
Maybe something like this is happening again. The power shortages all over the country, especially in the West. Enron trying to fix prices with the government, almost as if they were absolutely positive there would be a huge demand for power in that area. Is the US government building a new type of facility or researching a new type of weapon that will once again revolutionize warfare as the nuclear bomb did 55 years ago?
Terrifying to think about. Is it possible to revolutionize the art of killing the much ever again?
okay, everyone who doesn't hate the hell out of george w. bush: raise your damn hand. this guy's a complete dope, and has yet to do anything right in office. impeach!
What if the XBOX doesn't fail? You failed to consider this possibility, and according to your entire (mostly meaningless) statement, it is a major factor. You can never just assume that something will or won't make it in a country. It is, after all, a whole country. Be a little less of an ass next time you open it.
This could be a ploy by NASA to try to convince teenagers not to drink, lie or cheat if they want to be an astronaut. I don't know how well it would work, because most youth don't want to be astronauts right now, but it isn't a bad idea.
Just thought I'd submit this possibility for consideration.
But if you had a program such as this on your Windows machine, someone would think of a way to incorporate it into an email worm and activate it remotely. Something like this could send all your personal data to someone you don't even know, and without you even knowing about it. If a program like this is ever written, it would be a major security risk to any Windows user.
Possibly even more of a security risk than Outlook. Mmmm, maybe not.
Every other type of stem cell except for the Embryonic Stem Cell (ESC) exhibits rapid aging. By rapid, they mean hours to days before the entire cell line is dead (in culture). These cells have very short life spans and take a very short time to reproduce. By aging, they mean "unbidden mutation." ESCs don't do this, and apparently neither do these. This is an amazing advancement.
But you're right, the important thing is whether or not these cells can be put into a human (and work). Then we would find out what kind of aging (in the well-known human sense of the word) these cells experience.
but now that UROPs won't get paid, what's the point?
Oh yeah, the excellent school/ excellent atmosphere bit. Right.
Throughout history, the true innovators were rewarded for their knowledge, not penalized for something they didn't really have anything to do with. Poor spending is poor spending, but save the salaries...
I expect to hear from people on my innovators of history part, but bear in mind I said most....
Ummm, you didn't say most, you said true.
no, they're going to sue for owning a crappy product (netscape), but licensing the best Win32 browser (IE) and bundling it with their service, and then wishing that the best product weren't just SO DAMN MUCH BETTER.
Why do you say that the hardware is being compromised for the OS? This seems like a rather biased viewpoint. If the hardware is optimized for the OS that everyone uses or it is expected that everyone will use with that system, then the hardware company that made the hardware in question did an excellent job bending to the monopoly. That way, they can sell more machines to the consumer, because it comes packaged with Windows XP, and is designed to perform well with it.
Bear in mind that it is possible, of course, to optimize Linux for use with the processor, as it is possible to optimize Linux for every other processor as well, and perhaps the reason AMD decided to optimize the processor for Windows was because Windows cannot be optimized by the user for use with the processor, whereas Linux can be optimized by the user.
Do they plan to try to use their leverage in the internet service provider market to persuade some hardware manufacturers into packaging a different OS into their machines? A new OS based on Linux (so we wouldn't mind), but with an easy-to-use [AOL] interface and only one real way to connect to the internet [AOL](so the average Joe Schmuck could use it). Obviously, AOL would be trying to use a monopoly it wishes it had in order to maneuver itself into a new market. Does anyone else see any possible antitrust implications inherent in this deal?
This is exactly what people blame Microsoft for doing, only in the opposite direction.
If someone were to not feel pain, they would lack the necessary measure of self-preservation which allows us to survive. Pain is feedback that is an integral part of an organism's self-organization.
People ran into this problem when Angeldust was popular years ago: when someone feels invulnerable, they act invulnerable, and when they act invulnerable, they soon discover that they are not, and they get severely injured. Or they die.
I wonder, how can anyone think that windows is "easy to use" compared to MacOS? Or "more reliable"???? At least for the 3.11/95/98 series, which is what we are talking about.
Um, why must we only be talking about Windows up to Windows 98? Everybody thinks that's a piece of crap. If you want to exclude Windows 2000 (in fear), then you say "We are only considering the home computer, because surely those are the only idiots who would use Winbloze!" Well, if you want home systems, what about XP Home? That's a home OS that is at least as stable as Win2k (and anything else on the market), and as easy to use as OS X (maybe).
If you want to complain about marketing departments, bear in mind that Apple also has an excellent marketing department that, despite lacking the vast piles of sheer cash that Microsoft has, instead uses shiny things to attract the attention of the consumer.
Open Source will not be successful among the average user until the coders behind it realize that the average user is incredibly stupid, and that they don't want to spend a lot of time learning your "superior" system, and they are willing to pay an extra few hundred bucks for a system that comes to them easy (they don't have to build it and they don't have to install an OS), and most of all, they hate to be called stupid!! Microsoft and Apple never call their customers lame or dumb or incompetent, and they seem not to care how much better at using their own system than the person to whom they are trying to sell it. Linux has this problem. Suck it up, or go buy an iMac.
i wish they would discontinue the qwerty keyboard, because it basically renders them useless for students who are not rich enough to buy another one. if you can't use it on the test, don't use it anywhere. learn, dammit. and games are worthless.
oh crap- my contradictory views will probably get me killed (again).