The difference is if a company uses their monopoly to hurt competitors in the industry the monopoloy is held in, it's OK. What's illegal is to use the monopoly to get leverage in a different industry. Monopoly in OS should not be used to create an advantage in something else (like digital audio players). Microsoft's "argument" is that IE is actually part of the OS is directly to this point - if it's (a necessary) part of the OS, then it's legal.
Other things come into account, like margins, growth, etc. Yes, looking at their 1.5% of the world today may not seem like much, but if their margin is double Dells, if they have better brand awareness, if they are considered the pacesetter in the marketplace, etc. all those things deserve a higher valuation (P/E ratio) than Dell.
There's nothing funny about the share market - it's reflecting a preference function and expectations.
If you'd drop cable and make the broadcasters compete (and increase their market share) they'd start picking up good shows and the quality would increase quite a bit.
No, the broadcasters would assume they're doing something right, stop competing, and you'd get more pablum. Seriously, when has reducing your choices improved quality? Do you think if Firefox and Safari go away, IE will get better? If USAns just stopped buying Japanese cars, GM would start building something decent?
And that comment gets +5 insightful? Puleeze! It has to be about the most clueless thing I've seen on/., and that's saying a lot.
Wouldn't pedestrian licenses improve NYC for residents? I mean it's not like the tourists will have stood in line at the DPM (Department of Pedestrian Movement) for the 6 months needed to get the license. Or have been willing to fork over the $2500. for the yearly fee, plus the $20./day for hotdogs of questionable ancestry or toxicity while waiting.
It all comes down to value for the price. If they want to sell more CDs, they'll stop trying to put copy protection on them (burning their paying customers), and drop the price to what the market will bear.
I mean, if I can't sell my house for 400K, then I drop the price until it sells. Do these guys think $20. is some natural price point?
If you can afford the 50-inch plasma, the 7.2 surround sound system, and appropriate high quality inputs, you might as well have a rack of G5 servers rendering your own customized movies too. Forget DVR, think the moral equivalent of Avid Nitris.
I don't think Jung correlated anything with brain activity; measuring brain activity (or localizing it), is a fairly recent thing, requiring modern scanning techniques to perform. Now the problem is, that pretty much any kind of brain scan results gets published, which is pretty foolish too. I don't think that having people think about "white houses" and localizing some point in the brain that is stimulated really tells us much about cognition. But I seem to be currently in the minority in the cogsci universe...
Since we Apple users wrote that personality report you loved so much, keep thinking that. We've got a few other things to sell you besides personality upgrades and appeal to classy females. Oh and one more thing... Apple has a new version of the iPod that replaces a tooth. It's only $3499., and requires a dentist to install, but it is PC compatible.
No, I think it's more like "Morton's Steakhouse offered to give all the kids a free, hermetrically sealed steak dinner, but the project declined, saying they needed to use unpackaged food so it could be tampered with."
What's wrong with the argument is it doesn't admit to the current pricing strategy of using hardware profits to develop software. Two-tiered pricing for the software will just tend to generate illicit sales at the lower pricing level, so the best solution for the pricing model is to avoid sales outside the hardware market. Presumably the pricing of an independent software market is prohibitive enough that they felt they would not get sufficient sales. At any rate, such decisions are up to those who are betting their own money, and not the gadflys, n'est pas?
I don't think so. I think the USPTO created their policy on perpetual motion patents because they were inundated with "working models," some of which, amazingly enough, are still working after over 100 years. (But actually gain energy, e.g, through tidal or barometric forces).
maybe the new OS they're planning on releasing next year called Windows Vista? Perhaps? The new Internet Explorer? The new Windows Media Player? The new Hotmail? The new MSN Search?
How many of those "new technologies" run on a Mac or even an iPod?
D: Your Honor, Defense introduces exhibits A-ZZZ, the actual sound items defendant is accused of illegally downloading, which we will play for the court now, and introduce into evidence.
[sounds of rap, house, whatever it is that "kids listen to these days"]
D: Are these the sound recordings you are accusing my client of having illegally downloaded?
P: Yes, so stipulated.
D: Your honor, we agree these sound recordings were downloaded, however, no copyright can be held because that's not music and as the court knows, noise cannot be copywritten.
J: So noted. Case dismissed, with prejudice. Get that crap out of my courtroom.
$3K is very roughly the equivalent of 3 person-days of labor for a research project, corporate or even University (once you include overhead, a percentage of a professor, or research staff). I don't think anyone doing corporate research on new products is going to bat an eye; the only question is how easy they've made it to play with the technologies (how much do I have to spend in labor or additional projects in order to determine if this is the technology I need for my next product)?
Now if you were planning on a home project on the order of putting together a lisp machine from eBay scrap, well, you better be one of those real early adopters who were willing to wire wrap yourself S-100 boards, or build cars out of junk. Hobbies are not cheap! But you will be the first on your block!!
What I don't understand is why, oh why hasn't apple incorporated an FM tuner into their iPod line yet??
Because the point of the iPod is to be able to program your own radio station using your own tunes instead of what some top-100 marketing bloke thinks you should be listening to, capice? If you want a radio, there are far far cheaper ones. Those of us who bought iPods did so because we can't stand the damn things. And we don't have to worry about it fading in and out, interference, static, etc. Who needs XM? I'm coast to coast with my 60G baby.
There's difficult, and there's difficult. While operating system programmers may have to sweat out these details, the vast majority of us write applications, and such details should be completely hidden at that level of abstraction.
Slashdot Mirror
The difference is if a company uses their monopoly to hurt competitors in the industry the monopoloy is held in, it's OK. What's illegal is to use the monopoly to get leverage in a different industry. Monopoly in OS should not be used to create an advantage in something else (like digital audio players). Microsoft's "argument" is that IE is actually part of the OS is directly to this point - if it's (a necessary) part of the OS, then it's legal.
Other things come into account, like margins, growth, etc. Yes, looking at their 1.5% of the world today may not seem like much, but if their margin is double Dells, if they have better brand awareness, if they are considered the pacesetter in the marketplace, etc. all those things deserve a higher valuation (P/E ratio) than Dell.
There's nothing funny about the share market - it's reflecting a preference function and expectations.
And that comment gets +5 insightful? Puleeze! It has to be about the most clueless thing I've seen on /., and that's saying a lot.
Wouldn't pedestrian licenses improve NYC for residents? I mean it's not like the tourists will have stood in line at the DPM (Department of Pedestrian Movement) for the 6 months needed to get the license. Or have been willing to fork over the $2500. for the yearly fee, plus the $20./day for hotdogs of questionable ancestry or toxicity while waiting.
I mean, if I can't sell my house for 400K, then I drop the price until it sells. Do these guys think $20. is some natural price point?
If you can afford the 50-inch plasma, the 7.2 surround sound system, and appropriate high quality inputs, you might as well have a rack of G5 servers rendering your own customized movies too. Forget DVR, think the moral equivalent of Avid Nitris.
(I am a cognitive scientist).
Since we Apple users wrote that personality report you loved so much, keep thinking that. We've got a few other things to sell you besides personality upgrades and appeal to classy females. Oh and one more thing... Apple has a new version of the iPod that replaces a tooth. It's only $3499., and requires a dentist to install, but it is PC compatible.
No, I think it's more like "Morton's Steakhouse offered to give all the kids a free, hermetrically sealed steak dinner, but the project declined, saying they needed to use unpackaged food so it could be tampered with."
What's wrong with the argument is it doesn't admit to the current pricing strategy of using hardware profits to develop software. Two-tiered pricing for the software will just tend to generate illicit sales at the lower pricing level, so the best solution for the pricing model is to avoid sales outside the hardware market. Presumably the pricing of an independent software market is prohibitive enough that they felt they would not get sufficient sales. At any rate, such decisions are up to those who are betting their own money, and not the gadflys, n'est pas?
I don't think so. I think the USPTO created their policy on perpetual motion patents because they were inundated with "working models," some of which, amazingly enough, are still working after over 100 years. (But actually gain energy, e.g, through tidal or barometric forces).
OK, I give up. What other reason is there?
Riiiight. Instead, we have Consumer Reports do that.
[sounds of rap, house, whatever it is that "kids listen to these days"]
D: Are these the sound recordings you are accusing my client of having illegally downloaded?
P: Yes, so stipulated.
D: Your honor, we agree these sound recordings were downloaded, however, no copyright can be held because that's not music and as the court knows, noise cannot be copywritten.
J: So noted. Case dismissed, with prejudice. Get that crap out of my courtroom.
Try holding it really close to your eye, like a HUD.
I was thinking almost the same thing: "Why can't my iPod stream coffee from the coffeeshop?" I mean, I wouldn't have to wait in line or anything...
That depends; their PR department may not believe what they say, they only believe what they say will sell software.
Now if you were planning on a home project on the order of putting together a lisp machine from eBay scrap, well, you better be one of those real early adopters who were willing to wire wrap yourself S-100 boards, or build cars out of junk. Hobbies are not cheap! But you will be the first on your block!!
There's difficult, and there's difficult. While operating system programmers may have to sweat out these details, the vast majority of us write applications, and such details should be completely hidden at that level of abstraction.