but all companies compare to the same time the previous year. This isn't some random metric Apple made up. I'm sure Apple would like to take credit for a making a metric all companies use but they can't.
This guy stating there is no fix, it can't be fixed is making statements about as dumb as those who say their favorite OS (e.g. Linux) is immune from any virus/worms/hacks.
She didn't say Google was violating anti trust laws. What she said and as I took it was that MS's monoply isn't a threat to the 'future', be it future economy or companies or whatever. The future threat is Google and people who are looking to beat Google at Google's game is going to have a very hard time because of Google.
For this lady, I think it comes down to this question: How many people/companies are scrambling to dethrone Windows as an OS vs how many people/search engines/ad companies are looking to dethrone Google as a search engine/ad machine?
'Everyone' is trying to out google Google these days, not take down MS.
Well that's a matter of speculation since some of us have never needed it and just might never need it. So until that day when you might be right, we will stick with 'Social programs are pork as well.'
Setting aside Anti MS bias. What type of employees do you think MS hires? A mediocore MS employee is probably like saying a C student at Harvard. Relative to the company they keep, ok they're average but as a whole they are probably top tier.
Except the people are all under working under a set of rules to achieve something. The system is what puts this into place. If people don't believe in the system(and in turn the rules and goals) they're working for, they will do what they believe is best which might be different than the 'system'.
Extreme example: Capitalism vs Communism. They each have different systems in place to achieve their ends. If the people don't agree with the end goal, doesn't make them necessarily bad or good but they will do the most in their power to undermind that end goal.
I've wanted this for a very long time now but on a national scale. If everyone can see where they rank at any given time.. well who wants to be the dumbest 7th grader in the country for english class?
there are financial firm stockholders who took your advice who probably put a gun to their mouth and pulled the trigger.
It's not irrational if there is a half way decent chance or circumstances that could make the rumor true (i.e. Apple is very secretive of Jobs health and they have an idea for his successor but won't tell us yet).
You also have to factor that there are companies where people (foolishly or not) or buying into one man. With Apple, I'm sure many are buying into Jobs and I'm sure there are quita a few who aren't buying into Berkshire but into Buffett. If rumor was to spread that he died (and his successor I'm pretty sure isn't named yet) his stock would probably take a small plunge. Probably not as much (percentage wise) as Apple given Berkshire isn't as focused as Apple.
1. Their stocks wouldn't plummet to 0. 2. Those 3 companies (esp MS) have more lawyers than this law firm and a much bigger bankroll to appeal this to the end of time.
MS has fended off the government by themselves. With Google and Yahoo! backing them, they can wipe this law firm off the map.
Re:From one consumer's perspective...
on
Bad Signs For Blu-ray
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Another consumer's perspective:
I own a Sony 60" 1080p tv. I own a HD DVD player. I own a BR player. I rent an HD DVR from Cox. I can tell the difference between HD and SD. I have no desire to go back to SD. I paid new technology prices for each player and it was worth it to me.
I have no desire to use digital downloads. I like my physical copy. I'll make my own digital copies, but thanks anyway.
Don't you have to be somehow affected by defendant's actions to sue them? Is the Quebec's open-source software association harmed by this directly? Or do they have a plan to sell tech support contracts once the free software is installed?
I've always been against mentioning the name of the accused in court. If they request it, everyone should be under a gag under to keep their name and face out of the media/court docs until found guilty. They do a pretty damn good job of it under rape shield (which I'm against) so it shouldn't be too hard to do for the defendant.
Slashdot Mirror
Partially related:
You can't buy certain parts to certain Ferraris unless you are documented somewhere in Ferrari's systems as owning the car in question.
what does he sound like?
but all companies compare to the same time the previous year. This isn't some random metric Apple made up. I'm sure Apple would like to take credit for a making a metric all companies use but they can't.
This comment will be saved and referenced in one year.
so are movies 'with a little effort', but that dodges the point of the article.
I noticed you made a point not to say:
This guy stating there is no fix, it can't be fixed is making statements about as dumb as those who say their favorite OS (e.g. Linux) is immune from any virus/worms/hacks.
tell that to the owners of Kleenex, xerox, and Q-tip, and coke, and they'll laugh you all the way to the courtroom.
She didn't say Google was violating anti trust laws. What she said and as I took it was that MS's monoply isn't a threat to the 'future', be it future economy or companies or whatever. The future threat is Google and people who are looking to beat Google at Google's game is going to have a very hard time because of Google.
For this lady, I think it comes down to this question:
How many people/companies are scrambling to dethrone Windows as an OS vs how many people/search engines/ad companies are looking to dethrone Google as a search engine/ad machine?
'Everyone' is trying to out google Google these days, not take down MS.
Well that's a matter of speculation since some of us have never needed it and just might never need it. So until that day when you might be right, we will stick with 'Social programs are pork as well.'
Setting aside Anti MS bias. What type of employees do you think MS hires? A mediocore MS employee is probably like saying a C student at Harvard. Relative to the company they keep, ok they're average but as a whole they are probably top tier.
Ransom starring Mel Gibson. Came on this morning.
Except the people are all under working under a set of rules to achieve something. The system is what puts this into place. If people don't believe in the system(and in turn the rules and goals) they're working for, they will do what they believe is best which might be different than the 'system'.
Extreme example: Capitalism vs Communism. They each have different systems in place to achieve their ends. If the people don't agree with the end goal, doesn't make them necessarily bad or good but they will do the most in their power to undermind that end goal.
I defintely remember and was very let down when I had to accept it was never going happen. :(
My goal to see a massive soviet tank rush into eastern Europe from a 1st person perspective might never be realized. :(
http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/
Happy now?
I've wanted this for a very long time now but on a national scale. If everyone can see where they rank at any given time.. well who wants to be the dumbest 7th grader in the country for english class?
there are financial firm stockholders who took your advice who probably put a gun to their mouth and pulled the trigger.
It's not irrational if there is a half way decent chance or circumstances that could make the rumor true (i.e. Apple is very secretive of Jobs health and they have an idea for his successor but won't tell us yet).
You also have to factor that there are companies where people (foolishly or not) or buying into one man. With Apple, I'm sure many are buying into Jobs and I'm sure there are quita a few who aren't buying into Berkshire but into Buffett. If rumor was to spread that he died (and his successor I'm pretty sure isn't named yet) his stock would probably take a small plunge. Probably not as much (percentage wise) as Apple given Berkshire isn't as focused as Apple.
They don't have to ban it but the moment any of those non Ford approved parts causes your car to need maintenance, they'll ask one question:
"What warranty? Your warranty went out the door when that part was installed. "
The burden then is on you to prove that non Ford approved part didn't break it and Ford has nothing but time.
You might get a nice Ford dealer and then there is no issue but if you don't, good luck.
No I think you are completely wrong on this one.
uh no.
1. Their stocks wouldn't plummet to 0.
2. Those 3 companies (esp MS) have more lawyers than this law firm and a much bigger bankroll to appeal this to the end of time.
MS has fended off the government by themselves. With Google and Yahoo! backing them, they can wipe this law firm off the map.
Another consumer's perspective:
I own a Sony 60" 1080p tv.
I own a HD DVD player.
I own a BR player.
I rent an HD DVR from Cox.
I can tell the difference between HD and SD.
I have no desire to go back to SD.
I paid new technology prices for each player and it was worth it to me.
I have no desire to use digital downloads. I like my physical copy. I'll make my own digital copies, but thanks anyway.
Run JP Morgan into the ground with legal fees? Yea good luck with that.
That about sums it up.
Don't you have to be somehow affected by defendant's actions to sue them? Is the Quebec's open-source software association harmed by this directly? Or do they have a plan to sell tech support contracts once the free software is installed?
I've always been against mentioning the name of the accused in court. If they request it, everyone should be under a gag under to keep their name and face out of the media/court docs until found guilty. They do a pretty damn good job of it under rape shield (which I'm against) so it shouldn't be too hard to do for the defendant.
4 out of 5 /. ers with high IDs are though.