What's also funny is that your link even cites statutory law that completely contradicts you:
It is true that 10 U.S.C. 2320(a)(2)(F) states that “a contractor or subcontractor (or a prospective contractor or subcontractor) may not be required, as a condition of being responsive to a solicitation or as a condition for the award of a contract, to sell or otherwise relinquish to the United States any rights in technical data [except in certain cases, and may not be required to ] refrain from offering to use, or from using, an item or process to which the contractor is entitled to restrict rights in data”
Also since I actually do work at a company who contracts for the government, almost none of the software we create the government can release as open source or public domain as the company reserves the copyright. This is also very typical for a lot of government contracting. So thus, you're entire premise is absolutely false. Not to mention your false conflation of "public domain" with "open source".
No where in there at all says that any software paid for by the government is in the public domain. In fact, the phrase "public domain" doesn't even exist in that article. Your link only specifies the circumstances when something can released as OSS which is not the same as what you claimed.
This article summarizes when the U.S. federal government or its contractors may publicly release, as open source software (OSS), software developed with government funds.
Clearly you didn't even read the link you posted. Now, can you provide the actual law that says that software paid for by the government has to be in the public domain?
You think they can't already listen to your calls and read your text messages if they wanted to? They can have their towers tell your phone to use unencrypted channels and thus snoop everything.
Oh noes, not A CAMERA!!!! Except for your first one, which happens even with a dumbphone as cell towers will log your location, all of the other things are optional features that you don't have to use if you don't want to. You can choose to use those features or not. It's not as if someone is forcing you to do so.
Because ad revenues for TV and newspapers have been plummeting for a couple years now and it's only commonsense to think that the same thing is going to happen with ad revenue on the web? Or are you one of those people who were trying to convince everyone that the dotcom bubble was non-existent or how real estate values could never possible go down?
I'm not trying to be clever or insightful I was simply answering the asinine question. Canonical is in no way the next Apple other than in completely superficial terms.
Stuff "just worked" on Mandrake and that came along less than 10 years after the beginning of Linux.
Sure as long as you whitewash over the fact that lots of hardware wasn't supported or the ones that were didn't have support for many of the advanced features of the hardware.
MacOS is less transparent,
In what way?
tends to castrate the usefulness of interfaces,
Please provide examples.
tends to make dealing with legacy and alien data harder
In what way?
and tends to give you these all encompassing uber-apps that are like the exact opposite of the Unix approach to building tools.
Yes, they are providing what the users actually want. Most users don't want to have to string together a bunch of tiny apps by piping around ASCII strings just to get things done. Hence why Mac OS X is far more popular as a desktop Unix than any of the alternatives.
But it can't be due to that! It has to be because he's a part of the Apple cult or he was taken in by the Job's Reality Distortion Field or he's some ignorant hipster! Apple can't possibly provide a better quality product that just doesn't fit into the Apple hater's universe of possibilities!
And the reason why it took until late 2006 and early 2007 for Blu-Ray to really take off is that studios like Fox didn't even start releasing Blu-Rays until the end of 2006. So basically your entire argument has been demolished by the actual historical evidence. Blu-Ray was beating HD DVD months before Warner even decided to switch and their own dual format title releases were consistently selling better on Blu-Ray as well.
Wow, "millions". Apple just makes a measly $65 billion in revenue and $14 billion in profit a year. I'm sure they are quaking in their boots over the nebelous "millions" that Canonical makes.
That's what you claim, but the actual evidence backs me up.
You forget the moment in 2008 when Sony paid Warner Brothers a metric shit-ton of cash to go Blu-Ray Exclusive.
I don't forget that at all. Doesn't change the fact that when Warner was releasing both formats that the Blu-Ray was consistently outselling the HD DVD version by wide magins. And by early 2007 Blu-Ray was already outselling HD DVD. There are a multitude of other stories from early 2007 through mid 2007 showing the same thing long before Warner went exclusive. By mid 2007 Blu-Ray was selling 2:1 over HD DVD.
Before that moment, HD-DVD was outselling Blu-Ray. It was really that simple.
Except by "that simple" you mean "simply false", right? You can try to reinvent history but a simple Google search is enough to show the historical evidence is against you.
Yes, Windows 8 runs on ARM as well as x86. So what? Microsoft has had versions of Windows running on ARM now for 15 years (WinMo and WinCE) and yet clearly Intel is still alive.
Can I plant some open source libraries or source code into the product, sit back for a while, then demand the company release the rest of the product as open source?
Do you want to be taken to court and sued for a value many times your life's worth?
Look at Blender for example. It has became a MAJOR contender in the 3d space. the last release has taken steps that are starting to pass horribly overpriced commercial products like Maya.
And by major contender you mean it's still used by almost no one in the game or movie industry, right?
Before the PS3 launched, HD-DVD was actually winning the format war despite Sony USA refusing to put out any of their movie catalog in the format.
It was "winning" only because there were really no Blu-Rays out at that time, but even at that point HD DVD had abysmal sales. When Blu-Ray was launched in earnest the top Blu-Ray titles was outselling HD DVD by wide margins and even the dual format titles were selling something like 5:1 in Blu-Rays favor.
Really sad to see that Nokia didn't have the confidence in their hardware design and manufacture skill to give Android a chance.
Why would they want to compete for less profits in the already low-margin Android camp? Not being another "me too" Android company actually gives them a chance to set themselves apart and not be caught in the HTC/Samsung/Motorola race to the bottom.
Slashdot Mirror
What's also funny is that your link even cites statutory law that completely contradicts you:
It is true that 10 U.S.C. 2320(a)(2)(F) states that “a contractor or subcontractor (or a prospective contractor or subcontractor) may not be required, as a condition of being responsive to a solicitation or as a condition for the award of a contract, to sell or otherwise relinquish to the United States any rights in technical data [except in certain cases, and may not be required to ] refrain from offering to use, or from using, an item or process to which the contractor is entitled to restrict rights in data”
Also since I actually do work at a company who contracts for the government, almost none of the software we create the government can release as open source or public domain as the company reserves the copyright. This is also very typical for a lot of government contracting. So thus, you're entire premise is absolutely false. Not to mention your false conflation of "public domain" with "open source".
No where in there at all says that any software paid for by the government is in the public domain. In fact, the phrase "public domain" doesn't even exist in that article. Your link only specifies the circumstances when something can released as OSS which is not the same as what you claimed.
This article summarizes when the U.S. federal government or its contractors may publicly release, as open source software (OSS), software developed with government funds.
Clearly you didn't even read the link you posted. Now, can you provide the actual law that says that software paid for by the government has to be in the public domain?
Software paid for by the government is supposed to be free in the public domain.
And this has been codified in which act of Congress?
Even if the phone OS doesn't track you, you're still being tracked by the logged registration events your phone has with the cell towers.
You think they can't already listen to your calls and read your text messages if they wanted to? They can have their towers tell your phone to use unencrypted channels and thus snoop everything.
Been there, done that. It was called OpenMoko and it went down in flames due to lack of consumer interest.
4) Has a camera, sometimes front and back
Oh noes, not A CAMERA!!!! Except for your first one, which happens even with a dumbphone as cell towers will log your location, all of the other things are optional features that you don't have to use if you don't want to. You can choose to use those features or not. It's not as if someone is forcing you to do so.
Why do you think it's a bubble?
Because ad revenues for TV and newspapers have been plummeting for a couple years now and it's only commonsense to think that the same thing is going to happen with ad revenue on the web? Or are you one of those people who were trying to convince everyone that the dotcom bubble was non-existent or how real estate values could never possible go down?
I'm not trying to be clever or insightful I was simply answering the asinine question. Canonical is in no way the next Apple other than in completely superficial terms.
Stuff "just worked" on Mandrake and that came along less than 10 years after the beginning of Linux.
Sure as long as you whitewash over the fact that lots of hardware wasn't supported or the ones that were didn't have support for many of the advanced features of the hardware.
MacOS is less transparent,
In what way?
tends to castrate the usefulness of interfaces,
Please provide examples.
tends to make dealing with legacy and alien data harder
In what way?
and tends to give you these all encompassing uber-apps that are like the exact opposite of the Unix approach to building tools.
Yes, they are providing what the users actually want. Most users don't want to have to string together a bunch of tiny apps by piping around ASCII strings just to get things done. Hence why Mac OS X is far more popular as a desktop Unix than any of the alternatives.
But it can't be due to that! It has to be because he's a part of the Apple cult or he was taken in by the Job's Reality Distortion Field or he's some ignorant hipster! Apple can't possibly provide a better quality product that just doesn't fit into the Apple hater's universe of possibilities!
How dare he like something you disapprove of!!! Let's call him a n00b and an idiot! That'll show him how big your e-penis is!
When the ad industry collapses, yes, they will be. Or do you somehow think that the web ad bubble is never going to burst?
And the reason why it took until late 2006 and early 2007 for Blu-Ray to really take off is that studios like Fox didn't even start releasing Blu-Rays until the end of 2006. So basically your entire argument has been demolished by the actual historical evidence. Blu-Ray was beating HD DVD months before Warner even decided to switch and their own dual format title releases were consistently selling better on Blu-Ray as well.
Wow, "millions". Apple just makes a measly $65 billion in revenue and $14 billion in profit a year. I'm sure they are quaking in their boots over the nebelous "millions" that Canonical makes.
And if you want even more evidence check out this graph from Nielsen. Notice how Blu-Ray surpasses HD DVD more than a year before Warner switched.
The link I meant to post was this: http://www.betanews.com/article/Bluray-Disc-Sales-Surpass-HD-DVD/1172267610
Here is another link:
Blu-ray outsold HD DVD by a nearly 2-to-1 margin for the first nine months of the year, selling 2.6 million units to HD DVD’s 1.4 million.
Again, this story was like 8 months before Warner switched. Sorry, but your post is historical revisionism nonsense.
Incorrect.
That's what you claim, but the actual evidence backs me up.
You forget the moment in 2008 when Sony paid Warner Brothers a metric shit-ton of cash to go Blu-Ray Exclusive.
I don't forget that at all. Doesn't change the fact that when Warner was releasing both formats that the Blu-Ray was consistently outselling the HD DVD version by wide magins. And by early 2007 Blu-Ray was already outselling HD DVD. There are a multitude of other stories from early 2007 through mid 2007 showing the same thing long before Warner went exclusive. By mid 2007 Blu-Ray was selling 2:1 over HD DVD.
Before that moment, HD-DVD was outselling Blu-Ray. It was really that simple.
Except by "that simple" you mean "simply false", right? You can try to reinvent history but a simple Google search is enough to show the historical evidence is against you.
No.
Yes, Windows 8 runs on ARM as well as x86. So what? Microsoft has had versions of Windows running on ARM now for 15 years (WinMo and WinCE) and yet clearly Intel is still alive.
Can I plant some open source libraries or source code into the product, sit back for a while, then demand the company release the rest of the product as open source?
Do you want to be taken to court and sued for a value many times your life's worth?
Look at Blender for example. It has became a MAJOR contender in the 3d space. the last release has taken steps that are starting to pass horribly overpriced commercial products like Maya.
And by major contender you mean it's still used by almost no one in the game or movie industry, right?
Before the PS3 launched, HD-DVD was actually winning the format war despite Sony USA refusing to put out any of their movie catalog in the format.
It was "winning" only because there were really no Blu-Rays out at that time, but even at that point HD DVD had abysmal sales. When Blu-Ray was launched in earnest the top Blu-Ray titles was outselling HD DVD by wide margins and even the dual format titles were selling something like 5:1 in Blu-Rays favor.
Really sad to see that Nokia didn't have the confidence in their hardware design and manufacture skill to give Android a chance.
Why would they want to compete for less profits in the already low-margin Android camp? Not being another "me too" Android company actually gives them a chance to set themselves apart and not be caught in the HTC/Samsung/Motorola race to the bottom.