There is a growing law practice in the US for knocking these fees down. I have been hunting for the article and can't find it. Anyway, in several large recent class action settlements, the class was not satisfied with getting a coupon, while the lawyers walked away with millions. After the case was won, the "class" goes and hires another law firm to attack the initial firm for excessive fees. The fees get significantly reduced. If you find the article, please post it!
"Remember: Microsoft hasn't|doesn't pay dividends, hence their cash reserve (warchest) in excess of $40B.(for those who doubt divdends are paid, I suggest you spend a few minutes of research. "
Umm.. they just shelled out $0.16 USD a share. Check your stock quote information, and check the dates on that google data....
This is all ok. They are going to make the content 25% more valuble than it was at $.99
I am going to write to my congresswoman on this one. I can't see where commodity prices increased their costs on this operation to justify the price increase. This is monopoly practice.
Is the RIAA going to blame OPEC to justify the cost increase of electronic distribution?
I went to boarding school in Malvern, in the UK. You are correct about the playground culture over there. I did not get beaten up for being a geek, but I did get beaten up for being the only American!
There was a bug (dev oversight, whatever) in the previous version of iTunes that would not let a user sync an iPod and an ipod mini on the same system under Windows. Why would anyone want to do this? I have an ipod, I would like to have an ipod mini for when I go running or work out. Less weight, and I don't need more than 4GB worth of music for a two our use time.
The previous resolution to this problem was to unhook the ipod from the computer, load the ipod mini software, hook the ipod mini in, sync, then unhook the mini, rehook the ipod.. remove the mini software, reinstall the ipod software.. you get the drill, a real pain.
The guy at the "genius bar" told me to get a mac, because I would JUST need to log in as a different user to use both devices on one system.
Has anyone tried this with the new version on Windows yet?
These patents are not for the FAT file system. IANAL. The Microsoft one is for long file name support that goes on top of the FAT file system. The "prior art" one (5307494) describes some sort of long file name support augmenting a specific file system, but does not state which file system from what I can tell.
Like many of you, I went out and purchased an iPod, and it changed the way that I listened to music. I finally ripped all the CD's that I owned. All 326 of them. It was a little alarming to see how many CD's I had that I only felt that I needed to rip one or two songs from.
In the past 12 months leading up to my iPod purchase, I had purchased 4 CD's. In the past two months since I have had the iPod, I have purchased 122 songs from iTunes. (for the slow folks at the RIAA, that is $64 retail, fully burdened gross cost, without tax, vs. $120.78, digital distro cost, without tax... you can figure out which one nets you more profit)
I find it perfectly reasonable, and worth my time, to pay $0.99USD for a song that I like on iTunes. For that price, it is not worth my time to find the song on a peer to peer service, and deal with the issues of "gee, is this song of any quality.. or... what the heck, this is not the song that I wanted".
Jack up the prices, and I will stick to my radio and XM. Keep the prices where they are, and you get more money out of me.
Let them go ahead and raise on line music prices. Let them charge me more, and "bundle" songs I don't want at he same time.
Then let them try to justify to Congress why they get to keep their copyrights when they abused their monopoly power to protect them. (price increase + bundle = monopoly practice. When used to promote copyrighted material may result in loss of copyright protection - Napster had the opportunity to challenge the industry on this, but chose not to)
To all the US bashers out there. What other nation in the history of the world managed it's position of power as well as the United States has? ie: Had the power, but didn't have the need to conquer and enslave the remaining world population???
I have been out of school for a while, and was speaking with a friends son yesterday about what his education is costing him. Did it dawn on public policy officials that the cost of a BS from a good school is surpassing $100,000 USD? (with some hitting $160K)
Making the assumption that smarter people tend to gravitate towards BS programs (Comp Sci, Engineering, Biotech, etc); who in their right mind is willing to invest $100,000+ in a future career that will probably gross $35,000 USD annually in a few years?
You wonder why there are less technical degrees being churned out in the US!
What do you think that the Peace Corps is for? A friend of mine in the Peace Corps (American), ran a "General Store" in Rwanda. Explains why folks come to the US to run their own "General Store" here....
Give this dude the obvious award. People who don't know enough to lock down there computers are the real security problem, more so than any OS.
All in all, I did like the article, but I thought that the author was being irresponsible in some areas. I thought that it was a bit irresponsible to blame Windows for using "ports" as being a security issue. I realize that open ports are a problem, but they are a potential problem for ANY operating system. OS/X was hinted at being secure because it did not leave any ports open in the basic installation, and Linux was not mentioned at all, which implied that it did not have any issues around these dangerous "port" things.
Windows is the largest target out there, both for commercial and malicious intent. Toss in the fact that everybody hates MS, and that is why we end up with so many people targeting it. It does also help that it is not that hard of a taget to hit.
I had an employer back in Texas who was advised by their legal department about this. The issue was folks in the phone support center. They were on salary, but the company mandated work schedules and shift. There was some OSHA rule that stated if someone was on a mandated schedule (management told them when they needed to start the day, and stop it), they had to be on hourly rate.. and thus were eligible for overtime.
"3. If we tax the shit out of businesses, won't they encourage them to cut costs by laying more people off?".. and go overseas to avoid the taxes and take advantage of cheaper labor
The thing that cracks me up about all of this is the whole statement about "Overqualified folks will look for a new position faster than 'just' qualified folks" Duh! They also get a hell of a lot more done in the short time that they are there!
We are dealing in a corporate America that cannot see past the end of the coming quarter. I make it a habit of hiring the most qualified people that I can, and I don't expect them to stick around for more than two years. As a manager, I would be absolutely stupid not to do that. Most of my projects need to be done within three quarters, because management is usually not around to fund anything longer than that. The "over qualified" folks that I hire have traditionally been professional enough to stick it out to the end of a project. Once a new project starts, I am ok with new heads.
I work in a fortune 100 company as a manager, or more appropriately a technical lead. I am short staffed. The more experience my new hires have, the better off I am. When I look at my career, I have 1) never been unemployed, 2) never finished college, 3) been at Fortune 100 companies for my entire career since 18, 4) I am 33, my shortest tenure at any company has been 4 years, 5)I am usually one of the first to jump ship when things start going south. One thing that I have noticed is that the good people are usually the first to jump on their own terms.
I am also amazed at how my "top 10 best places to work" employer goes out of their way to remind people that this is a "work at will" environment. If you keep telling your folks that they can be terminated at any time, then don't be suprised when the good ones start walking out the door. It is a two way street. The hypocracy of expecting loyalty from employees without the employer offering any security is amazing.
It doesn't matter, the damage is done
on
What if SCO is Right?
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Either way, the spectre of "intellectual property" has been brought up to Corporate America. Boards and CEO's who get gunshy when the litigation is aimed at them are going to be skeptical about liability and open source software.
The point has been brought to the board rooms, and I don't know see what it can do other than hurt the cause.
I do not know if this law is still in play, but in 1997 there was a tax on this stuff.
If an LCD was included in a device, ie, a laptop, then the tax did not apply. However, if the LCD was on its own, ie: laptop spare part, or TV type display, then there was a large import tax on these things in the US.
The tax was put in place to protect the non existant US LCD panel industry. I don't know if it ever got repealed.
I disagree with you. Just because MS was declared a monopoly, does not mean that they have a monopoly in every area. I want to see real competition in the area of cross platform environments. Java is one,.NET is sort of another. If the courts force MS to propogate Sun's version of Java (note, we are not talking about the MS VM version here, the courts actually dictate that the Sun VM must be included), then, let's see.NET forced on SUN. Users get to CHOOSE which version that they want to go with, and not the courts.
It is all supposed to be about consumer choice, isn't it?
Fair is Fair. If MS has to carry Java, then Sun should have to ship with.Net Framework. The only provision is that MS would have to write it to work on Suns OS, as Sun does for Java.
What is the difference between what MS is doing, and some venture capital company investing $1 Billion dollars in an on line grocery store that goes belly up???? Absolutely NOTHING!
If Microsoft's shareholders are OK with Microsoft blowing money on "ventures", then there is no problem. Perfectly legal.
Slashdot Mirror
There is a growing law practice in the US for knocking these fees down. I have been hunting for the article and can't find it. Anyway, in several large recent class action settlements, the class was not satisfied with getting a coupon, while the lawyers walked away with millions. After the case was won, the "class" goes and hires another law firm to attack the initial firm for excessive fees. The fees get significantly reduced. If you find the article, please post it!
"Remember: Microsoft hasn't|doesn't pay dividends, hence their cash reserve (warchest) in excess of $40B.(for those who doubt divdends are paid, I suggest you spend a few minutes of research. "
Umm.. they just shelled out $0.16 USD a share. Check your stock quote information, and check the dates on that google data....
This is all ok. They are going to make the content 25% more valuble than it was at $.99
I am going to write to my congresswoman on this one. I can't see where commodity prices increased their costs on this operation to justify the price increase. This is monopoly practice.
Is the RIAA going to blame OPEC to justify the cost increase of electronic distribution?
I went to boarding school in Malvern, in the UK. You are correct about the playground culture over there. I did not get beaten up for being a geek, but I did get beaten up for being the only American!
Check out the "Handy Concept for Concept Rock" section on this page: http://www.apple.com/itunes/import.html
iTunes will let you meld tracks together.
There was a bug (dev oversight, whatever) in the previous version of iTunes that would not let a user sync an iPod and an ipod mini on the same system under Windows. Why would anyone want to do this? I have an ipod, I would like to have an ipod mini for when I go running or work out. Less weight, and I don't need more than 4GB worth of music for a two our use time.
The previous resolution to this problem was to unhook the ipod from the computer, load the ipod mini software, hook the ipod mini in, sync, then unhook the mini, rehook the ipod.. remove the mini software, reinstall the ipod software.. you get the drill, a real pain.
The guy at the "genius bar" told me to get a mac, because I would JUST need to log in as a different user to use both devices on one system.
Has anyone tried this with the new version on Windows yet?
No, it was not. the file system used by CP/M was not compatible with the one used in MS/DOS 1.0.
Had it been, I would have expected Digital Research to enforce their IP protection on MS.
These patents are not for the FAT file system. IANAL. The Microsoft one is for long file name support that goes on top of the FAT file system. The "prior art" one (5307494) describes some sort of long file name support augmenting a specific file system, but does not state which file system from what I can tell.
Like many of you, I went out and purchased an iPod, and it changed the way that I listened to music. I finally ripped all the CD's that I owned. All 326 of them. It was a little alarming to see how many CD's I had that I only felt that I needed to rip one or two songs from.
In the past 12 months leading up to my iPod purchase, I had purchased 4 CD's. In the past two months since I have had the iPod, I have purchased 122 songs from iTunes. (for the slow folks at the RIAA, that is $64 retail, fully burdened gross cost, without tax, vs. $120.78, digital distro cost, without tax... you can figure out which one nets you more profit)
I find it perfectly reasonable, and worth my time, to pay $0.99USD for a song that I like on iTunes. For that price, it is not worth my time to find the song on a peer to peer service, and deal with the issues of "gee, is this song of any quality.. or... what the heck, this is not the song that I wanted".
Jack up the prices, and I will stick to my radio and XM. Keep the prices where they are, and you get more money out of me.
Let them go ahead and raise on line music prices. Let them charge me more, and "bundle" songs I don't want at he same time.
Then let them try to justify to Congress why they get to keep their copyrights when they abused their monopoly power to protect them. (price increase + bundle = monopoly practice. When used to promote copyrighted material may result in loss of copyright protection - Napster had the opportunity to challenge the industry on this, but chose not to)
To all the US bashers out there. What other nation in the history of the world managed it's position of power as well as the United States has? ie: Had the power, but didn't have the need to conquer and enslave the remaining world population???
I can't think of one other than the US either.
I have been out of school for a while, and was speaking with a friends son yesterday about what his education is costing him. Did it dawn on public policy officials that the cost of a BS from a good school is surpassing $100,000 USD? (with some hitting $160K)
Making the assumption that smarter people tend to gravitate towards BS programs (Comp Sci, Engineering, Biotech, etc); who in their right mind is willing to invest $100,000+ in a future career that will probably gross $35,000 USD annually in a few years?
You wonder why there are less technical degrees being churned out in the US!
What do you think that the Peace Corps is for?
A friend of mine in the Peace Corps (American), ran a "General Store" in Rwanda. Explains why folks come to the US to run their own "General Store" here....
Give this dude the obvious award. People who don't know enough to lock down there computers are the real security problem, more so than any OS.
All in all, I did like the article, but I thought that the author was being irresponsible in some areas. I thought that it was a bit irresponsible to blame Windows for using "ports" as being a security issue. I realize that open ports are a problem, but they are a potential problem for ANY operating system. OS/X was hinted at being secure because it did not leave any ports open in the basic installation, and Linux was not mentioned at all, which implied that it did not have any issues around these dangerous "port" things.
Windows is the largest target out there, both for commercial and malicious intent. Toss in the fact that everybody hates MS, and that is why we end up with so many people targeting it. It does also help that it is not that hard of a taget to hit.
I had an employer back in Texas who was advised by their legal department about this. The issue was folks in the phone support center. They were on salary, but the company mandated work schedules and shift. There was some OSHA rule that stated if someone was on a mandated schedule (management told them when they needed to start the day, and stop it), they had to be on hourly rate.. and thus were eligible for overtime.
The company switched them all to hourly wage.
I am not a lawyer. Does this rule still apply?
"3. If we tax the shit out of businesses, won't they encourage them to cut costs by laying more people off?" .. and go overseas to avoid the taxes and take advantage of cheaper labor
The thing that cracks me up about all of this is the whole statement about "Overqualified folks will look for a new position faster than 'just' qualified folks" Duh! They also get a hell of a lot more done in the short time that they are there!
We are dealing in a corporate America that cannot see past the end of the coming quarter. I make it a habit of hiring the most qualified people that I can, and I don't expect them to stick around for more than two years. As a manager, I would be absolutely stupid not to do that. Most of my projects need to be done within three quarters, because management is usually not around to fund anything longer than that. The "over qualified" folks that I hire have traditionally been professional enough to stick it out to the end of a project. Once a new project starts, I am ok with new heads.
I work in a fortune 100 company as a manager, or more appropriately a technical lead. I am short staffed. The more experience my new hires have, the better off I am. When I look at my career, I have 1) never been unemployed, 2) never finished college, 3) been at Fortune 100 companies for my entire career since 18, 4) I am 33, my shortest tenure at any company has been 4 years, 5)I am usually one of the first to jump ship when things start going south. One thing that I have noticed is that the good people are usually the first to jump on their own terms.
I am also amazed at how my "top 10 best places to work" employer goes out of their way to remind people that this is a "work at will" environment. If you keep telling your folks that they can be terminated at any time, then don't be suprised when the good ones start walking out the door. It is a two way street. The hypocracy of expecting loyalty from employees without the employer offering any security is amazing.
Either way, the spectre of "intellectual property" has been brought up to Corporate America. Boards and CEO's who get gunshy when the litigation is aimed at them are going to be skeptical about liability and open source software.
The point has been brought to the board rooms, and I don't know see what it can do other than hurt the cause.
Intel found a last minute bug on Sunday night, and will not relase a processor that can take advantage this chipset until further notice!
d _t op
http://news.com.com/2100-1006-996611.html?tag=f
HP just introduced two low end calculator models.
0 12 3b.html
s s/2002/02103 1a.html
http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/2003/03
I have read in a few places that they have a high end one coming out closer to the end of the year.
New calculator division distributor expansion:
http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/pre
I do not know if this law is still in play, but in 1997 there was a tax on this stuff.
If an LCD was included in a device, ie, a laptop, then the tax did not apply. However, if the LCD was on its own, ie: laptop spare part, or TV type display, then there was a large import tax on these things in the US.
The tax was put in place to protect the non existant US LCD panel industry. I don't know if it ever got repealed.
... arrested for Bank Robbery, more news at 5.
I disagree with you. Just because MS was declared a monopoly, does not mean that they have a monopoly in every area. I want to see real competition in the area of cross platform environments. Java is one, .NET is sort of another. If the courts force MS to propogate Sun's version of Java (note, we are not talking about the MS VM version here, the courts actually dictate that the Sun VM must be included), then, let's see .NET forced on SUN. Users get to CHOOSE which version that they want to go with, and not the courts.
It is all supposed to be about consumer choice, isn't it?
Fair is Fair. If MS has to carry Java, then Sun should have to ship with .Net Framework. The only provision is that MS would have to write it to work on Suns OS, as Sun does for Java.
Seems like a fair shake to me.
What is the difference between what MS is doing, and some venture capital company investing $1 Billion dollars in an on line grocery store that goes belly up???? Absolutely NOTHING!
If Microsoft's shareholders are OK with Microsoft blowing money on "ventures", then there is no problem. Perfectly legal.