footnote in history, IBM OS/2 would have dominated? Sounds to me like he was saying a monopoly would exist it would just have been IBM's.
A more heterogeneous environment is an entirely different situation. Microsoft was dominant even in the age where IBM compatibles weren't fully compatible. DOS offered a common platform that applications could target. I'd suspect that if hardware unification never happens then Microsoft would have quickly had to abstract the hardware details through the OS and applications would have tied themselves even more tightly to DOS / Windows than they are today. More of less what Android is doing for various phone systems. So yes I think they would have have had potentially an even bigger monopoly since such an abstraction system would have worked well for embedded starting in the 1980s the same way Android is working so well for embedded today.
You have to make a more substantial change to the structure to avoid a copyright violation. Think if you were copying over encyclopedia articles re-indenting them wouldn't solve it.
Even most corporations that are today on XP have lots of.NET applications. A corporation with some stuff on XP is different than a corporation willing to be a decade behind uniformly. It isn't just Microsoft's stuff it would be every software vendor they have they would have to be running old applications.
BTC foundation? You mean bitcoin? Why would they care? Bitcoin is a few billion dollars best case and transaction volumes are in the tens of millions of day at best. The other markets they oversee are tens of trillions and often hundreds of billions a day in transactions.
I think congress right now sucks terribly. OTOH I think it could easily be better.
Uh are we talking about the same thing here? I thought we were talking about people who are still stuck on Windows XP.
GP was talking about corporations not individuals.
So it does not matter that ReactOS may never catch up with Microsoft, as long as ReactOS can catch up with the current businesses and organizations that are also having difficulty keeping up with Microsoft's changes.
My point is that even if ReactOS can move fast (i.e.gets a cash infusion) best case they are a decade behind. Being locked out of everything from the last decade is a pretty big minus. I can see ReactOS working as a legacy support system for the next few decades. I can't see it being an OS of choice for anyone.
If both sides are interested in dumb there is little be done. But I don't think that's always the case. This has happened in CA courts where the jury was almost entirely college educated and included several people who could code.
Not quite true Copyright protection may, however, extend to substantial literary expression—a description, explanation, or illustration, for example—that accompanies a recipe or formula or to a combination of recipes, as in a cookbook.
As for the fact the API copyright was clearly waived by Sun in making it so public Google raised this the judge agreed. I think Oracle has a weak case here as I mentioned in original post. We were excluding that issue and just talking about a private API.
Sure I have. There is creative content. Collections of facts in a written structure can be copyrighted. A cookbook for example can have copyright. A documentary, even one that is nothing more than collection of interview can be copyrighted. Etc...
I know lots of developers who love them. But regardless, you can't use sales as the measure of "win" in one post and then discard it in the next. If "win" is defined by sales those are wins. If win is not defined by sales but instead by cool then things like F# and LINQ are huge wins.
You are presenting why this isn't easy for consumers. GP was arguing that it was a structural issue. And I was saying it was easy for Microsoft to fix.
As far as Windows 7 not including XP, I didn't know that but obviously that's something Microsoft can change, that's their policy. As far as it not working for illegal versions of Windows 7... again, paying customers only. As far as ISO XP, I was suggesting just running applications not the whole thing. But either way Microsoft could sell a XP ISO with Windows 8 in China for use with websites, or they could include it free.
As for modern hardware... absolutely. Part of the point of Windows 8 is to start migrating people off old hardware. That's a feature not a bug. ____
For consumers individually this is a problem. Mostly you are indicating problems for consumers who pirated. It is Microsoft's job to make sure stuff breaks for pirating consumers. As far as lower end hardware.... I agree with Microsoft's direction in driving people towards better systems or Android. In China you have an explosion of $75-150 Android tablets that can easily be supported by the banks for those too poor to afford good systems.
That's one interpretation of an API. Another is that it is a creative work in itself in which case everything is protected except in the way it is licensed. You are just assuming API's aren't copyrightable to argue APIs aren't copyrightable effectively.
There are lots of rich people on all sides of the copyright debate. I suspect that the money issues don't apply as much because they cancel each other out. You are right that lobbyists would draft, but that's fine. Lobbyists are just acting like unpaid staffers in this case.
As for the appeals, the legislature can revise and amend when they discover they made a mistake.
Yes. But I had that opinion long before I was an Apple fan (OSX 10.1 days). I really like the functionality that Flash, Java applets, Active X (security obviously required)... offered. Javascript in being an open standard is taking something like 10-100x as much CPU to do the same thing.
I really liked the Windows world had 3 office suites that offered different features the others didn't. I used AmiPro (part of the Lotus office suite) because I loved genuine PostScript fonts and the better equation editing (at the time) that offered. On the other hand I appreciated the tremendous work that Microsoft did in getting OLE to work across Office products today. Those were closed systems, there is no way to have compatibility with different feature sets. Lotus couldn't have worked with lowest common denominator fonts like Bitstream. Microsoft couldn't have gotten OLE to work without using the internals of applications.
Microsoft: XP support is ending but we are selling you this magnificent new operating system called Windows 8. Company: Gee, I dunno, the price is kind of high. I think we'll just go with Linux... Microsoft: Go for it. Would you like Suse or RedHat's phone number? We find that most companies that don't already have a UNIX culture prior to a switch to Linux can blow through 2,3,4x their IT budget on conversion and still often fail. There are success stories but those companies were dedicated and focused on their IT infrastructure. If you want to be dedicated and focused on your IT infrastructure for years rather than your core business Ralf Flaxa will be happy to talk to you. He's a great guy and I'm sure you'll love working with him for years and years at a cost of many millions or billions. Company: Well now that you mention it maybe one of your alternative licensing options....
Why keep pushing for the new GUI when most of the veterans hates to learn a new GUI?
There are a couple reasons. The primary one is that Microsoft wants their GUIs unified between server, enterprise desktop and consumer desktop. Which means they need to move everything. The old GUI doesn't support modern hardware and can't scale to small screens. It can never be effective as a phone or tablet GUI.
Moreover young people are having a very difficult time adapting to many of the traditional GUIs because they assume paradigms that really only make sense with respect to dual floppy computers. By breaking hard with those traditions they are able to have GUIs that match modern hardware and modern functionality better. Veterans won't like this because their understanding evolved along with the systems from the older paradigms. Microsoft is well aware of that. But they don't want to allow their user base to further fragment with respect to age and the young hate the traditional GUI more than the old are likely to resist the new.
That's really easy to fix. Obviously the banks can fix it. If not. Windows 7 comes with XP. Windows 8 hypervisor can easily support an XP / IE 6 for banking. If that were the problem I don't see why Microsoft couldn't have easily overcome it for paying customers.
No they wouldn't. Say by 2016 ReactOS is perfect. That still doesn't solve.NET applications. Say that takes 2 more years and gets them to.NET 2. By 2018 we are talking.NET 6 applications are standard in business, while they can now run 2005's software well.
Slashdot Mirror
footnote in history, IBM OS/2 would have dominated? Sounds to me like he was saying a monopoly would exist it would just have been IBM's.
A more heterogeneous environment is an entirely different situation. Microsoft was dominant even in the age where IBM compatibles weren't fully compatible. DOS offered a common platform that applications could target. I'd suspect that if hardware unification never happens then Microsoft would have quickly had to abstract the hardware details through the OS and applications would have tied themselves even more tightly to DOS / Windows than they are today. More of less what Android is doing for various phone systems. So yes I think they would have have had potentially an even bigger monopoly since such an abstraction system would have worked well for embedded starting in the 1980s the same way Android is working so well for embedded today.
You have to make a more substantial change to the structure to avoid a copyright violation. Think if you were copying over encyclopedia articles re-indenting them wouldn't solve it.
Even most corporations that are today on XP have lots of .NET applications. A corporation with some stuff on XP is different than a corporation willing to be a decade behind uniformly. It isn't just Microsoft's stuff it would be every software vendor they have they would have to be running old applications.
What duties do they have with respect to bitcoin that you don't think they fulfilled? And what does bitcoin combine with?
BTC foundation? You mean bitcoin? Why would they care? Bitcoin is a few billion dollars best case and transaction volumes are in the tens of millions of day at best. The other markets they oversee are tens of trillions and often hundreds of billions a day in transactions.
I think congress right now sucks terribly. OTOH I think it could easily be better.
Very interesting. I looked it up. Most common reason is default config is 256MB of RAM. Unless you changed that...
Really? Do you know why it is slow?
Oracle's argument is that an API is a structure of facts not a list of facts.
GP was talking about corporations not individuals.
My point is that even if ReactOS can move fast (i.e.gets a cash infusion) best case they are a decade behind. Being locked out of everything from the last decade is a pretty big minus. I can see ReactOS working as a legacy support system for the next few decades. I can't see it being an OS of choice for anyone.
By revenue:
Oracle 33.8%
DB2 31.4%
SQL Server 13.9%
By unit sales given how much cheaper SQL Server is, the above figures say a lot.
If both sides are interested in dumb there is little be done. But I don't think that's always the case. This has happened in CA courts where the jury was almost entirely college educated and included several people who could code.
Not quite true Copyright protection may, however, extend to substantial literary expression—a description, explanation, or illustration, for example—that accompanies a recipe or formula or to a combination of recipes, as in a cookbook.
As for the fact the API copyright was clearly waived by Sun in making it so public Google raised this the judge agreed. I think Oracle has a weak case here as I mentioned in original post. We were excluding that issue and just talking about a private API.
Both sides from a pool of the population.
Sure I have. There is creative content. Collections of facts in a written structure can be copyrighted. A cookbook for example can have copyright. A documentary, even one that is nothing more than collection of interview can be copyrighted. Etc...
I agree it is a problem in general. I'm just saying in this particular instance it isn't a problem.
I know lots of developers who love them. But regardless, you can't use sales as the measure of "win" in one post and then discard it in the next. If "win" is defined by sales those are wins. If win is not defined by sales but instead by cool then things like F# and LINQ are huge wins.
You are presenting why this isn't easy for consumers. GP was arguing that it was a structural issue. And I was saying it was easy for Microsoft to fix.
As far as Windows 7 not including XP, I didn't know that but obviously that's something Microsoft can change, that's their policy. As far as it not working for illegal versions of Windows 7... again, paying customers only. As far as ISO XP, I was suggesting just running applications not the whole thing. But either way Microsoft could sell a XP ISO with Windows 8 in China for use with websites, or they could include it free.
As for modern hardware... absolutely. Part of the point of Windows 8 is to start migrating people off old hardware. That's a feature not a bug.
____
For consumers individually this is a problem. Mostly you are indicating problems for consumers who pirated. It is Microsoft's job to make sure stuff breaks for pirating consumers. As far as lower end hardware.... I agree with Microsoft's direction in driving people towards better systems or Android. In China you have an explosion of $75-150 Android tablets that can easily be supported by the banks for those too poor to afford good systems.
That's one interpretation of an API. Another is that it is a creative work in itself in which case everything is protected except in the way it is licensed. You are just assuming API's aren't copyrightable to argue APIs aren't copyrightable effectively.
Metro is one, what's the 2nd GUI?
There are lots of rich people on all sides of the copyright debate. I suspect that the money issues don't apply as much because they cancel each other out. You are right that lobbyists would draft, but that's fine. Lobbyists are just acting like unpaid staffers in this case.
As for the appeals, the legislature can revise and amend when they discover they made a mistake.
Yes. But I had that opinion long before I was an Apple fan (OSX 10.1 days). I really like the functionality that Flash, Java applets, Active X (security obviously required)... offered. Javascript in being an open standard is taking something like 10-100x as much CPU to do the same thing.
I really liked the Windows world had 3 office suites that offered different features the others didn't. I used AmiPro (part of the Lotus office suite) because I loved genuine PostScript fonts and the better equation editing (at the time) that offered. On the other hand I appreciated the tremendous work that Microsoft did in getting OLE to work across Office products today. Those were closed systems, there is no way to have compatibility with different feature sets. Lotus couldn't have worked with lowest common denominator fonts like Bitstream. Microsoft couldn't have gotten OLE to work without using the internals of applications.
That old negotiation tactic doesn't work.
Microsoft: XP support is ending but we are selling you this magnificent new operating system called Windows 8.
Company: Gee, I dunno, the price is kind of high. I think we'll just go with Linux...
Microsoft: Go for it. Would you like Suse or RedHat's phone number? We find that most companies that don't already have a UNIX culture prior to a switch to Linux can blow through 2,3,4x their IT budget on conversion and still often fail. There are success stories but those companies were dedicated and focused on their IT infrastructure. If you want to be dedicated and focused on your IT infrastructure for years rather than your core business Ralf Flaxa will be happy to talk to you. He's a great guy and I'm sure you'll love working with him for years and years at a cost of many millions or billions.
Company: Well now that you mention it maybe one of your alternative licensing options....
There are a couple reasons. The primary one is that Microsoft wants their GUIs unified between server, enterprise desktop and consumer desktop. Which means they need to move everything. The old GUI doesn't support modern hardware and can't scale to small screens. It can never be effective as a phone or tablet GUI.
Moreover young people are having a very difficult time adapting to many of the traditional GUIs because they assume paradigms that really only make sense with respect to dual floppy computers. By breaking hard with those traditions they are able to have GUIs that match modern hardware and modern functionality better. Veterans won't like this because their understanding evolved along with the systems from the older paradigms. Microsoft is well aware of that. But they don't want to allow their user base to further fragment with respect to age and the young hate the traditional GUI more than the old are likely to resist the new.
That's really easy to fix. Obviously the banks can fix it. If not. Windows 7 comes with XP. Windows 8 hypervisor can easily support an XP / IE 6 for banking. If that were the problem I don't see why Microsoft couldn't have easily overcome it for paying customers.
Now if these aren't paying customers then...
No they wouldn't. Say by 2016 ReactOS is perfect. That still doesn't solve .NET applications. Say that takes 2 more years and gets them to .NET 2. By 2018 we are talking .NET 6 applications are standard in business, while they can now run 2005's software well.
What's tempting about that?