Hear, hear. If I want to see Slashdot, I can click my mouse. Quite frankly, Red Hat's site has been a big loser for a long time. This job, at least the front page, looks like they grabbed some html'ers from the local high school and paid 'em a few bucks to gin up a page. I hope that's the case, because if they paid more for professionals, they got ripped.
Oh, and ditto the complaint on broken links. That tradition was certainly maintained. They may sell a good distribution, but their web site is an embarassment.
This was an issue when Digital Research owned DR-DOS. Digital Research "went away" and Novell bought much of their technology, including DR-DOS. As you know, there's no love lost between the boys in Orem and the gang in Redmond.
Novell started the legal rumblings some time ago (circa Win 3.1) when they claimed that Microsoft implemented changes to the code that specifically targeted DR-DOS and would not allow Windows to operate on top of that OS. Legal wheels grind and legal wheels churn. In the meantime, Caldera was created by Big Cheeses at Novell, ostensibly to focus on things like open software, however they also bought DR-DOS...and the pending legal action.
In fact, for quite a while, Caldera was really talking up the legal action...just short of the point of claiming the damages that they sought as an asset.
DR-DOS isn't what it used to be since the market has changed (in fact, the source code is freely available), but Caldera still perceives that Microsoft has damaged them. Maybe they have and maybe they haven't, but this is one of those cases that just cries, "Publicity!" It did when DR had it, it did when Novell had it, and it still does for Caldera. Unfortunately, as time has gone by, the stakes have gone down. The relevance of the case is still timely due to the "issues" that MS has with the DOJ, but not because of any particular demand for the software. While there are still a few people who use it, I think that it's safe to say that it's a dead horse. (apologies to the die hard DR-DOS users.)
Sander...you didn't really think that NARAS was more concerned about music than money, did you? Considering the cash cow that is the Grammies, I don't find it at all unusual that they pulled the ad.
That being said, I think it's too bad that the folks who are attempting to keep their stranglehold on the music industry are continuing this futile fight against alternative music formats. I'm reminded of the battles that the movie industry fought against television. Or that radio fought against television. Or that the record companies fought against cassette tapes.
Perhaps a better analogy might be that of trade unions. At one time there was a pressing need for them because workers were being ridden roughshod by their employers. Unions helped them by...well, you know the story. But today, the need isn't really there and unions are a vestige of a time gone by.
The same thing is true of the recording industry. It's about time that this stranglehold on recording media loosened and these vestiges of a time gone by were dumped.
But I think that as long as control and power can be centralized in the hands of one administrative body, you'll see actions like those of Grammy Magazine. They know who butters their bread.
Not so. Absolutely not so. The EULA informs you that you must contact your vendor for instructions on returning the product for a refund.
So here's the rub. What happens if the vendor says, "Look, we bundled the copy of Windows with your system and we're not going to unbundle it. Send the whole computer back."
What do you do? It strikes me that you have one of three choices. You send the computer back and buy one from a company that offers you a choice (VA, Penguin, etc.), you keep the computer and throw Windows off in a corner somewhere, or you keep complaining to the vendor until you either get the answer that you want, you get tired of complaining, or you realize that you are fighting a futile battle.
I worked for one of the big computer companies that sells Microsoft products. The policy was that if you didn't want Windows, then you could return the computer. That fit the letter of the EULA. Those were the instructions to be followed if you wanted to return Windows...box up the computer and return the whole works for a refund.
None of these vendors have refused to honor their obligations. They just haven't done things your way. Welcome to the real world. Sometimes you don't get your way.
I, for one, am glad that I was not there. While I don't particularly like the way that Microsoft writes and markets its software, I also don't ally myself with buffoons.
That's right, buffoons. Microsoft clearly and correctly made the point that if you bought Windows 9x bundled with a computer, then you must contact the vendor to arrange for a refund. Microsoft is not the vendor!
Did you buy your computer from Dell? Gateway? Micron? Toshiba? Sony? Those are vendors! Those are the companies that you need to contact.
And whomever said that if one part of the license was invalid meant that the license as a whole is invalid is not only wrong, but had the gall to follow up his demonstration of ignorance with advocation of software piracy. What a moron! Do we get to look forward to free/open software supporters being lumped together with software pirates?
All in all, I think that "refund day" was nothing more than a juvenile publicity stunt that was doomed to failure. The very idea of scheduling the stunt for a US federal holiday virtually guaranteed that the Microsoft offices would be closed.
A victory? Sure...a great publicity victory for Microsoft...and a significant step backward for the legitimacy of Linux and open software.
You're exactly right. I read the employment agreement that he signed. It seems pretty clear to me that DSC owns the "idea" that he invented. It also seems to me that they made a pretty generous offer to him.
I think that greed, to some degree, is present in us all, and this guy certainly exhibits it. He gambled that DSC would be willing to pony up more money and he lost. To draw the analogy to a close, when you gamble and lose, your money's gone. You don't whine to the casino that they should have let you win.
Probably the "right" thing would be for DSC to drop the issue and let him develop his "idea" independently, but I think that it's pretty clear that the law is going to come out on their side. Maybe with their acquisition by Alcatel things will change, but the net result is that it's probably a good thing to read what's in that employment agreement before you sign it.
Perhaps Evan should be the postor boy for the caveat emptor society.
Gee, at the risk of sounding smug, I'll bet that I don't suffer from this problem under Linux. And besides, even if I did, the only person who would be able to find the info would be me or root. And since I'm the only one who logs in as root, I guess that this isn't a problem. Kinda cool!
Gee, and let's note that Charles Babbage came from Europe. CERN is in Europe. Turing was from Europe. Some guy named Linus Torvalds is from Europe.
And one more thing...it's not really correct to say that the US military funded the Internet. Although DARPA provided initial funding for the Internet, it was by no means a military project. All this business about a nuclear war-survivable network is false. The Internet came about so that DARPA didn't have to give computers to every university that wanted one...it was designed to save money, that's all.
Anyway, rant mode off, yes, the page is funny. Yes, comparisons can be made to anything that has seven layers, probably including Dagwood's sandwich. But the ravings that precede it aren't exactly correct.
These drives are old news. They've been around for several years. We had a few installed in our VAX 3000/4000 cluster around 1994...but the technology hasn't particularly matured and the pricing is astronomically high. They are a dying breed. We dumped ours in favor of magnetic media and the amount of hard drive space that we were able to buy for the money was significantly greater than the amount of solid state "drive" space. Count me out.
Been down this road before. Once the software is returned, it is no longer available for sale. During my stint at the un-named computer company, we received hundreds of copies of Windows 95, NT and 98 back with systems that were returned for whatever reason. The software could not be resold. Generally, it ended up being used internally for corporate systems, training, or, ahem, personal reasons. But it was NEVER resold.
Slashdot Mirror
Hear, hear. If I want to see Slashdot, I can click my mouse. Quite frankly, Red Hat's site has been a big loser for a long time. This job, at least the front page, looks like they grabbed some html'ers from the local high school and paid 'em a few bucks to gin up a page. I hope that's the case, because if they paid more for professionals, they got ripped.
Oh, and ditto the complaint on broken links. That tradition was certainly maintained. They may sell a good distribution, but their web site is an embarassment.
=h=
This was an issue when Digital Research owned DR-DOS. Digital Research "went away" and Novell bought much of their technology, including DR-DOS. As you know, there's no love lost between the boys in Orem and the gang in Redmond.
Novell started the legal rumblings some time ago (circa Win 3.1) when they claimed that Microsoft implemented changes to the code that specifically targeted DR-DOS and would not allow Windows to operate on top of that OS. Legal wheels grind and legal wheels churn. In the meantime, Caldera was created by Big Cheeses at Novell, ostensibly to focus on things like open software, however they also bought DR-DOS...and the pending legal action.
In fact, for quite a while, Caldera was really talking up the legal action...just short of the point of claiming the damages that they sought as an asset.
DR-DOS isn't what it used to be since the market has changed (in fact, the source code is freely available), but Caldera still perceives that Microsoft has damaged them. Maybe they have and maybe they haven't, but this is one of those cases that just cries, "Publicity!" It did when DR had it, it did when Novell had it, and it still does for Caldera. Unfortunately, as time has gone by, the stakes have gone down. The relevance of the case is still timely due to the "issues" that MS has with the DOJ, but not because of any particular demand for the software. While there are still a few people who use it, I think that it's safe to say that it's a dead horse. (apologies to the die hard DR-DOS users.)
HardCase
Sander...you didn't really think that NARAS was more concerned about music than money, did you? Considering the cash cow that is the Grammies, I don't find it at all unusual that they pulled the ad.
That being said, I think it's too bad that the folks who are attempting to keep their stranglehold on the music industry are continuing this futile fight against alternative music formats. I'm reminded of the battles that the movie industry fought against television. Or that radio fought against television. Or that the record companies fought against cassette tapes.
Perhaps a better analogy might be that of trade unions. At one time there was a pressing need for them because workers were being ridden roughshod by their employers. Unions helped them by...well, you know the story. But today, the need isn't really there and unions are a vestige of a time gone by.
The same thing is true of the recording industry. It's about time that this stranglehold on recording media loosened and these vestiges of a time gone by were dumped.
But I think that as long as control and power can be centralized in the hands of one administrative body, you'll see actions like those of Grammy Magazine. They know who butters their bread.
HardCase
Sheesh. Can you read?
It won't be posted until 20:00 pst. That's 8:00pm. Duh. It's 4:40pm pst right now.
Dude. You really are SAD.
Not so. Absolutely not so. The EULA informs you that you must contact your vendor for instructions on returning the product for a refund.
So here's the rub. What happens if the vendor says, "Look, we bundled the copy of Windows with your system and we're not going to unbundle it. Send the whole computer back."
What do you do? It strikes me that you have one of three choices. You send the computer back and buy one from a company that offers you a choice (VA, Penguin, etc.), you keep the computer and throw Windows off in a corner somewhere, or you keep complaining to the vendor until you either get the answer that you want, you get tired of complaining, or you realize that you are fighting a futile battle.
I worked for one of the big computer companies that sells Microsoft products. The policy was that if you didn't want Windows, then you could return the computer. That fit the letter of the EULA. Those were the instructions to be followed if you wanted to return Windows...box up the computer and return the whole works for a refund.
None of these vendors have refused to honor their obligations. They just haven't done things your way. Welcome to the real world. Sometimes you don't get your way.
I, for one, am glad that I was not there. While I don't particularly like the way that Microsoft writes and markets its software, I also don't ally myself with buffoons.
That's right, buffoons. Microsoft clearly and correctly made the point that if you bought Windows 9x bundled with a computer, then you must contact the vendor to arrange for a refund. Microsoft is not the vendor!
Did you buy your computer from Dell? Gateway? Micron? Toshiba? Sony? Those are vendors! Those are the companies that you need to contact.
And whomever said that if one part of the license was invalid meant that the license as a whole is invalid is not only wrong, but had the gall to follow up his demonstration of ignorance with advocation of software piracy. What a moron! Do we get to look forward to free/open software supporters being lumped together with software pirates?
All in all, I think that "refund day" was nothing more than a juvenile publicity stunt that was doomed to failure. The very idea of scheduling the stunt for a US federal holiday virtually guaranteed that the Microsoft offices would be closed.
A victory? Sure...a great publicity victory for Microsoft...and a significant step backward for the legitimacy of Linux and open software.
Thanks guys...for nothing.
I think that greed, to some degree, is present in us all, and this guy certainly exhibits it. He gambled that DSC would be willing to pony up more money and he lost. To draw the analogy to a close, when you gamble and lose, your money's gone. You don't whine to the casino that they should have let you win.
Probably the "right" thing would be for DSC to drop the issue and let him develop his "idea" independently, but I think that it's pretty clear that the law is going to come out on their side. Maybe with their acquisition by Alcatel things will change, but the net result is that it's probably a good thing to read what's in that employment agreement before you sign it.
Perhaps Evan should be the postor boy for the caveat emptor society.
hardcase
Gee, at the risk of sounding smug, I'll bet that I don't suffer from this problem under Linux. And besides, even if I did, the only person who would be able to find the info would be me or root. And since I'm the only one who logs in as root, I guess that this isn't a problem. Kinda cool!
Gee, and let's note that Charles Babbage came from Europe. CERN is in Europe. Turing was from Europe. Some guy named Linus Torvalds is from Europe.
And one more thing...it's not really correct to say that the US military funded the Internet. Although DARPA provided initial funding for the Internet, it was by no means a military project. All this business about a nuclear war-survivable network is false. The Internet came about so that DARPA didn't have to give computers to every university that wanted one...it was designed to save money, that's all.
Anyway, rant mode off, yes, the page is funny. Yes, comparisons can be made to anything that has seven layers, probably including Dagwood's sandwich. But the ravings that precede it aren't exactly correct.
These drives are old news. They've been around for several years. We had a few installed in our VAX 3000/4000 cluster around 1994...but the technology hasn't particularly matured and the pricing is astronomically high. They are a dying breed. We dumped ours in favor of magnetic media and the amount of hard drive space that we were able to buy for the money was significantly greater than the amount of solid state "drive" space. Count me out.
Been down this road before. Once the software is returned, it is no longer available for sale. During my stint at the un-named computer company, we received hundreds of copies of Windows 95, NT and 98 back with systems that were returned for whatever reason. The software could not be resold. Generally, it ended up being used internally for corporate systems, training, or, ahem, personal reasons. But it was NEVER resold.