This might seem like a thinly veiled attack in the form of a question, but it doesn't appear the StarOffice has really made a dent in Microsoft's ownership of the office suite market. Did Sun waste their time and money on this project?
If we were to offer them significantly less, many of the most talented and popular artists would simply go into retirement. In short, no pay, no play.
But then they wouldn't have their egos stroked by paparazzi and their throngs of fans. These people are not driven by economic utility, and that is what you are basing your model on.
Brad Pitt would make movies for half of his going rate if that is all that was offered. What else is he going to do, sell used cars?
Quit treating these people as dispassionate, rational agents out of an ecomomics textbook. It doesn't wash.
They already had lost over a million men at Stalingrad, what could be worse? They were going to fight to the last man, this after Stalin had already offered previously to surrender vast tracts of Western Russia to the Nazis.
Both Proof and Copenhagen were disappointing. It seems the standards for "play of the year" (both won) aren't quite up to the "Long Day's Journey Into Night" days or even "Glengarry Glen Ross".
But admittedly most managers have factored in the cost of Windows as a constant - how many managers are looking to excise Windows to save money? I understand the motivation to do so, but I know of no prominent cases.
Through a strange series of events we have ended up with unregulated monopolies. SBC controls almost every aspect of telecommunications in California, for example, but there is almost no oversight or regulation of their activities.
Consumers have been the victims of this unfortunate series of events. I don't know when things will change - we are looking at three companies - Verizon, Qwest, SBC, carving up most of the markets in the country in the next few years, and it seems they will be content to simply milk money from the services they currently offer instead of innovating.
Many telcos are still holding back updating signal repeaters until some of the fiber equipment becomes more advanced, and much cheaper. There is very little motivation for telcos to make investments in expensive first generation equipment- since they have tacit monpolies in their districts, they can simply wait for cheaper hardware to make its way on to the market.
That said, some telcos are making the investment, particularly in new neighborhoods.
Yes, but Microsoft isn't actively pushing LDAP into its developer tools at this point, as I mentioned, they are focusing more on web services. This of course should not imply that I think directories are bad or that LDAP is a bad standard, simply that it hasn't dramatically altered development strategy as it was positioned to.
Yes, there are people using LDAP, there are even people using X.500 - but more or less these technologies have not altered IT thinking in the dramatic way they were positioned. Arguably the XML-based approach of web services is more timely - its hard to make an argument of listing another protocol on an isolated port to provide a solitary service.
There also doesn't appear to be much corporate interest - Microsoft has moved its mindshare strategies to web services, leaving the only big backer of LDAP being Novell - not really a key industry player at this point.
Oh please, the "dollars follow eyeballs" fantasy hasn't been mouthed by anyone worth their weight in salt in over two years. 99% of the posts Google is archiving have absoluately zilch, nada value, to anyone, including the original posters.
My guess is that Google will realize that 95% of the searches pertain to posts from the last twelve months and will send the rest back to the tape locker.
a chip with plenty of growth room left (PowerPC) to a chip nearing the end of its line (x86).
Apple is the only company buying the Motorola PPC variant in bulk. Motorola is on the ropes now, and will likely charge more that the already premium price it gets for the processors.
The x86 has been at "the end of its line" from the pundits perspective for five years, yet strangely enough the P4 and AMD chips are among the world's fastest processors. There is much more money being spent optimizing x86 compatibility than is being spent on the PPC architecture, and x86 emulation will be around until you die.
This would mean throwing out Apple's big advantage - that they can integrate the OS and the hardware nicely
What does this really mean? FireWire is available in PCs, and plug-and-play is more a function of software. I don't see how Apple's hardware does anything more than create image.
So you say OSX is "unix" - how so? By being POSIX compliant? MS OSs can be POSIX compliant. By offering a terminal with popular command line utilities? CygWin offers all of that on Windows, including APIs for programming support. Vi? Emacs? Bash? Lynx? Apache? I can have them all on Windows if I wish.
In fact, its hard to argue that OSX or Linux or Solaris is "unix" anymore by the classical definition of a small simple OS with tools that communicate over the simplest of protocols - the pipe (lifted from "The Unix Philosphy", by Mike Gancraz). Linux is already moving towards component architectures, and the rest of the unix-like systems globbed on so much additional functionality that they left "simple" behind long ago.
I argue that Windows 2000 can be made to be as much like whatver you see of unix in Linux, which I further argue is in name only.
I define the semantic web as one where context and typing in data are explicit, not inferred. This almost necessarily means using XML to accurately cast data in an ordered and typed fashion. The benefits of such a system would be tools that would provide radically expanded functionality for different types of data and services.
Right now, linux is secure and stable, but little else. Actually this in itself is a naive comment as anyone surfing bugtraq will see that linux is not lacking in bugs, exploits, and the like.
So once MS catches up in the stability dept (all the while, doing the whiz-bang stuf people want), how will linux be marketed? This isn't a troll, a serious question - in my own opinion it will boil down to price, as linux will likely have no technical advantages by mid-2003.
A web of rich XML metadata and smart tools won't emerge in 2002, in that I disagree with Cringeley. Search engines like Google and Teoma as well as fading tools like the Yahoo directory are still adequate for finding most data (and most types of data) that users require.
It will take new markets for new services to truly make the semantic web, and hence XML, necessary. Meta-auctions might be one such services, but the big auction players are doing a good job of keeping such services from collecting data.
My prediction for 2002 is that linux will push out the other unices in everything but the top tier of serving needs, and that Microsoft will own everything else. Apple will sink beneath 5% userbase as most home users back off from its increasingly expensive (relative to PCs) machines.
IBM will also back off of linux somewhat in 2002 as it fails to bring home substantial new incomes for the company.
Red Hat will wipe out the other distros.
One of Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft will leave the console market.
And on top of all that, who's to say they are actually "in line"? Who put them in charge? Why can't I just walk up to the booth the day of the movie in front of them and buy a ticket?
In any case, for TPM I simply bought my tickets on opening day with no problem whatsoever - the ticket drought was contrived.
In 2002 and forward, linux will have to stand on its own as a solution. Price is a selling point, but if companies can derive greater utility from buying AIX or Solaris, they are going to do it. Of course the same logic goes for AIX and Solaris, so Linux benefits from a pragmatic approach as well.
Business thinking has succesfully slayed the cult of IT. Computers and software are now simply assets of production and utility just like a welding machine or a printing press. Treating technology as cool for its own sake put a great many companies in trouble, both by overextending IT spending and by giving people like sysadmins and engineers disproportionate power in the organization. The heydeys of tech are over.
Lets face it, the sustaining force behind this entire community website is Microsoft bashing and unabashed (often unreasoned) linux advocacy. Why shouldn't MS fire back?
Maybe its a message to the linux community that its time to grow up. Look back at Amiga, Be, and OS2 newsgroups and you'll see the fine tipping point where advocacy gets stifling, annoying, and often leaves only the completely clueless fanboys participating in the discussion at all.
Personally I'd like to see/. evolve a bit in 2002...beating the linux drum is a useful practice, but a raison d'etre, it does not make.
You could even review the code, to make sure there are no implementation errors, and should you find a bug you might even *gasp* give back to the community, and submit a patch.
Yes, the community of open-source satellite operators will be grateful indeed.
Slashdot Mirror
This might seem like a thinly veiled attack in the form of a question, but it doesn't appear the StarOffice has really made a dent in Microsoft's ownership of the office suite market. Did Sun waste their time and money on this project?
But then they wouldn't have their egos stroked by paparazzi and their throngs of fans. These people are not driven by economic utility, and that is what you are basing your model on.
Brad Pitt would make movies for half of his going rate if that is all that was offered. What else is he going to do, sell used cars?
Quit treating these people as dispassionate, rational agents out of an ecomomics textbook. It doesn't wash.
They already had lost over a million men at Stalingrad, what could be worse? They were going to fight to the last man, this after Stalin had already offered previously to surrender vast tracts of Western Russia to the Nazis.
As for working capital and manpower, the Nazis were simply stealing or forcing much of what they needed.
Both Proof and Copenhagen were disappointing. It seems the standards for "play of the year" (both won) aren't quite up to the "Long Day's Journey Into Night" days or even "Glengarry Glen Ross".
But admittedly most managers have factored in the cost of Windows as a constant - how many managers are looking to excise Windows to save money? I understand the motivation to do so, but I know of no prominent cases.
Americans simply need to realize that the telcos have gotten away with murder and they are going to get screwed for a very very long time.
Consumers have been the victims of this unfortunate series of events. I don't know when things will change - we are looking at three companies - Verizon, Qwest, SBC, carving up most of the markets in the country in the next few years, and it seems they will be content to simply milk money from the services they currently offer instead of innovating.
That said, some telcos are making the investment, particularly in new neighborhoods.
Sit in your chair properly.
Take simple preventative measures such as stretching to reduce pain and stress due to repeated tasks.
This has all been commonly known for years now, and most businesses will provide rudimentary ergonomic audits for their employees.
Yes, but Microsoft isn't actively pushing LDAP into its developer tools at this point, as I mentioned, they are focusing more on web services. This of course should not imply that I think directories are bad or that LDAP is a bad standard, simply that it hasn't dramatically altered development strategy as it was positioned to.
There also doesn't appear to be much corporate interest - Microsoft has moved its mindshare strategies to web services, leaving the only big backer of LDAP being Novell - not really a key industry player at this point.
Oh please, the "dollars follow eyeballs" fantasy hasn't been mouthed by anyone worth their weight in salt in over two years. 99% of the posts Google is archiving have absoluately zilch, nada value, to anyone, including the original posters.
My guess is that Google will realize that 95% of the searches pertain to posts from the last twelve months and will send the rest back to the tape locker.
Apple is the only company buying the Motorola PPC variant in bulk. Motorola is on the ropes now, and will likely charge more that the already premium price it gets for the processors.
The x86 has been at "the end of its line" from the pundits perspective for five years, yet strangely enough the P4 and AMD chips are among the world's fastest processors. There is much more money being spent optimizing x86 compatibility than is being spent on the PPC architecture, and x86 emulation will be around until you die.
This would mean throwing out Apple's big advantage - that they can integrate the OS and the hardware nicely
What does this really mean? FireWire is available in PCs, and plug-and-play is more a function of software. I don't see how Apple's hardware does anything more than create image.
In fact, its hard to argue that OSX or Linux or Solaris is "unix" anymore by the classical definition of a small simple OS with tools that communicate over the simplest of protocols - the pipe (lifted from "The Unix Philosphy", by Mike Gancraz). Linux is already moving towards component architectures, and the rest of the unix-like systems globbed on so much additional functionality that they left "simple" behind long ago.
I argue that Windows 2000 can be made to be as much like whatver you see of unix in Linux, which I further argue is in name only.
I define the semantic web as one where context and typing in data are explicit, not inferred. This almost necessarily means using XML to accurately cast data in an ordered and typed fashion. The benefits of such a system would be tools that would provide radically expanded functionality for different types of data and services.
So once MS catches up in the stability dept (all the while, doing the whiz-bang stuf people want), how will linux be marketed? This isn't a troll, a serious question - in my own opinion it will boil down to price, as linux will likely have no technical advantages by mid-2003.
It will take new markets for new services to truly make the semantic web, and hence XML, necessary. Meta-auctions might be one such services, but the big auction players are doing a good job of keeping such services from collecting data.
My prediction for 2002 is that linux will push out the other unices in everything but the top tier of serving needs, and that Microsoft will own everything else. Apple will sink beneath 5% userbase as most home users back off from its increasingly expensive (relative to PCs) machines.
IBM will also back off of linux somewhat in 2002 as it fails to bring home substantial new incomes for the company.
Red Hat will wipe out the other distros.
One of Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft will leave the console market.
In any case, for TPM I simply bought my tickets on opening day with no problem whatsoever - the ticket drought was contrived.
Hopefully people will be putting all of this power to good use. I wonder if C programming will become as rare as assembler programming is today?
Business thinking has succesfully slayed the cult of IT. Computers and software are now simply assets of production and utility just like a welding machine or a printing press. Treating technology as cool for its own sake put a great many companies in trouble, both by overextending IT spending and by giving people like sysadmins and engineers disproportionate power in the organization. The heydeys of tech are over.
What illegal practices are put forth in the email?
Maybe its a message to the linux community that its time to grow up. Look back at Amiga, Be, and OS2 newsgroups and you'll see the fine tipping point where advocacy gets stifling, annoying, and often leaves only the completely clueless fanboys participating in the discussion at all.
Personally I'd like to see /. evolve a bit in 2002...beating the linux drum is a useful practice, but a raison d'etre, it does not make.
Yes, the community of open-source satellite operators will be grateful indeed.
I think that tinfoil you wrap around your head to shield you from the government mind control satellite needs to be loosened a bit.
On top of it all, why would you think for a minute that Yahoo or AOL or your own mom and pop ISP won't sell your data?
By the way, you don't own a credit card, do you?