Actually, we developed all of our applications from scratch. These banking applications are not part of or use any part of a shrink-wrapped application. We even write the APIs for these.
So the figures are based on development time. Some of our applications are easily portable. We know this since we recently converted from OS/2 to Windows 2000 (client-side) and several applications were ported over while others had to be completely re-written.
As for old, our applications are generally as old as our bank (10+ years) and have only been updated or re-written when changes were made on the client, server or host side, or when changes in regulations required it.
So unlike most organizations which only use shrik-wrapped applications like Office, Banks, Governments and the like only use these apps as tools which can easily be changed. The core of Merril Lynch's infrastructure, like that of my own company, is dependant on much more specialized applications, mission critical stuff.
Without these programs people like you and I would have no access to our money, that's why I say it takes balls.
I work for one of the largest banks in the world (Top 5) and we almost ditched our entire Windows Server infrastructure in favor of Linux. Why? Not because it wasn't working.
Unlike a lot of MS haters, we know how to use Windows. Strangely enough, when used the way MS intended it works pretty well.
Instead we considered Linux for similar reasons as Merril Lynch. When we asked MS for a deal on licencing our 300+ Windows 2000 Servers the way they did for Windows NT4.0, not only did they say "No" they auditted our current licences and told use we owe them money! They were the ones who sold us the licences in the first place!
So on top of each Windows 2000 Server licence, they want client access licences for EVERY computer (6000+) and a yearly subscription fee for god knows what!
I mean, what's the point of a server if no one can access it? Per-seat licencing for 6000+ workstations?
It wasn't until we weighed it against the cost of redeveloping 120 applications for Linux that we decided to cave. MS knows this. They waited for companies to become dependant on their OS before jacking up the price. What Merril Lynch is doing is not whoop-de-doo! another company went to Linux!, it's truly amazing. For such an enormous organization to revamp on such a huge scale takes cahones.
I like the idea of simple designs which may have the ability to evolve on their own, if in a somewhat accelerated (by design) manner, far more than simply designing a machine that performs a human task so well but not much else, such as expert machines.
Not that expert machines don't have their place in the world, for the most part they have improved things in the world. But I think it's dangerous to design human-like machines when the intent is to enslave them.
I mean, isn't the ultimate goal of AI research to create Intelligence? Do we really plan to enslave that intelligence as well?
I wrote an email to Ray Kurzweil once posing this question to him and he agreed that unfortunately, it's still called Artificial Intelligence but I would assume this is because people are so hard to convince. As for enslaving them I think it's a matter of funding.
People are willing to spend money on machines who will do all of their work for them but would be less likely to fork it over if they were told the machines would just be, and not work for the man.
That's why I like Brooks. Why try and replicate the design of the most complicated peice of machinery evolution ever invented when you can create simpler beings? Lower the bar a little and I bet we could create truly amazing machines that aren't human in any way.
Kind of like that agent program that was featured in/. a year or so ago...(sorry, I couln't find it)
These programs were given the ability to post to an IRC channel and also retrieve the messages without any human intervention. They started communicating with each other (there were 4 I beleive) in a way that the designers could not interpret at all!
I say design a machine with the BIOS to control itself (say RAM, HDD, Limbs, sensors etc...) and a few protocol stacks at it's disposal for developing communication abilities. The CPU could be a neural-net or series of FPGAs, something that could alter itself based on evolutionary algorithms and the instruction set could be...nothing!
Let it figure itself out the way human babies do! Sure, several will destroy themselves in some way but I think eventually, one would start to figure things out on it's own.
I don't know, just another crazy, crack-induced dream I guess...
My coworker lost the licence key for his copy of Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional.
Instead of borrowing a CD-Key from a freind, our employer or finding one on the Internet, he called Microsoft. He found the 1-800 # on their website (Customer Service, I beleive) and although he was transferred twice in the conversation, they readily supplied him with another valid CD-Key.
No questions, no validation or Proof of Purchace, they just gave it to him over the phone!
Two months later, he had to reinstall again (he messes around in the registry too much) and had forgotten where he placed the CD-Key. He called them again and without question they gave him another CD-Key!
If the most evil company in the world can do this for a customer, why can't the companies who sell CDs? DVDs? Hell, even books for that matter!
I can't beleive a single American Citizen still beleives he or she is being represented in the government...
I'm Canadian and even from our second-hand American media most Canadians know the American Government only represents 2 parties, Itself and Large Corporations.
The government is a business just like any other and all it cares about is money.
I know we watch about 1% of the night-sky for in-bound meteors/comets/etc... which may run the risk of colliding with the Earth, but do we watch the sky for object which could destroy the moon?
I know it's extremely unlikely but, what would happen if the moon were suddenly destroyed? Wouldn't that be nearly as bad as a direct hit with the Earth?
Think about it; no tidal pull to dictate the oceans would mean a serious disruption to the weather systems, possibly even the planet's rotation! I would think a direct hit could be almost a good thing by comparison. After all, it would mean no more BS like this...
Good post by the way. I have been fighting the/. Linux people on this point for months and it seems to be getting worse. First Lunix was just a good OS, then it was the best OS, then all other OSes were pitiful... you get the point. They seem to think the Industry Standards are something they can rewrite as they see fit. Don't get me wrong, I love Linux. I just think the Linux community has forgotten what they set out to do in the first place.
BTW, did you know Windows NT/2000/XP is a POSIX compliant OS? No BS. I haven't been able to run any POSIX software on any of them but it's in the white papers (not that it means anything).
I work in an entry level technical position. Even though my expertise and experience is much greater than that which is required for my job, I took it because hey, the market sucked and I have a family to feed.
The company I work for is very large and very stable. It's a bank, and even when the tech market "adjusted", the overall impact on my company was negligible.
So I do my job to the best of my ability, which is far better than most in my department, and for the most part I am recognized by being granted more responsibility and more say in the things that happen in the organization. I was even given the opportunity to coordinate the largest, fastest rollout the company has ever seen.
3600 Windows 2000 PCs across 120 locations, installed and configured by out-sourced techs who have no idea what our systems or proprietary applications are like, all completed in less than 8 weeks and me as the only single point of contact for all of the techs. I put out about 50 fires per night ranging from Server issues to Network outages and not once did a location have to fall back...not once.
I was told that it would be my ticket, my way out of my current boring, mindless position as a first-level support person.
I did well, better than anyone expected. I rarely escalated any problems past the point of a phone call. The entire project was called, "the most successful project in the company's history." One week later the company went through a massive re-org and where am I now?
Still changing passwords and asking retards to reboot when an application hangs on them. I attend the occasional meeting where my valued input counts towards the benefit of other departments and still sees me in the same place I have been for over 2 years.
So why do I hate my job?
Because no matter how many times I am commended for my excellent work, how many times my manager receives emails from our users that I went "above and beyond", no matter how many times my suggestion in a meeting gets implemented in the next production release, etc...
I am still in the same entry level position. I give this company everything it needs and more, and I get sweet fuck all. That's why I hate my job...
"monopoly Pronunciation Key (m-np-l) n. pl. monopolies Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service: "Monopoly frequently... arises from government support or from collusive agreements among individuals" (Milton Friedman). Law. A right granted by a government giving exclusive control over a specified commercial activity to a single party.
A company or group having exclusive control over a commercial activity. A commodity or service so controlled.
Exclusive possession or control: arrogantly claims to have a monopoly on the truth. Something that is exclusively possessed or controlled: showed that scientific achievement is not a male monopoly."
Take an economics course or something. This is not what Microsoft hold over the industry. Having options for other OS, even free options, means they do not Monopolize. I wish the/. community would realize that. Whether or not they use monopolistic practices is subjective. Of course if you were one of the companies forced out of business this is definitely the outlook (no pun intended).
They are however, what Microsoft is part of (in the OS market anyways) is an Oligopoly:
"oligopoly:
A market dominated by a small number of participants who are able to collectively exert control over supply and market prices."
I don't care what anyone says, if they aren't the only company selling OSes, they aren't a monopoly.
You should know better than to trust the law for anything...
I run WinNT using Checkpoint Firewall-1 as the PC connected directly to the Internet. I watch my own packet logs pretty closely since I was the victim of a pretty talented hacker last year. From my logs it just looks like one PC always connected to the Internet, not the 5 behind it.
Now I can't even get in from the outside, how the hell are they planning on doing it?
I tried to access the site but could not. The/. effect can now be classified as a DoS attack.
From the posts below I have extrapolated that/. is Anti-Microsoft, Anti-Intel, Anti-any-sort-of-establishment.
I mean, the points are valid. But doesn't anyone care that Intel has proved their chips are far more reliable under heat-emergencies than the AMD CPUs?
Yes, the Palomino has improved on this but it's like buying a car. Sure a Porshe Boxster is fast, and costs a fraction of the 911. But which car is a proven vehicle?
No, my analogy holds true because instead of whining about GM killing competition, companies who wish to compete do so on GM's terms.
When Ford introduced mass-production to the vehicle manufacturing world, the other companies had no choice but to compete on their terms. Same thing with MS.
If Netscape can't hold their own against MS in the browser market because MS has it integrated into their OS, either make an OS that includes Netscape or get the fuck out of Dodge! You people don't seem to understand you are questioning the very principles of Capitalism.
If you cannot compete against the giants, don't play the game.
And besides, Netscape sucks ass. I use it for my Debian because it's the only decent browser I could find. If I had the time to use IE5 for UNIX on it, I would.
What some people suggest, though, is that Microsoft stop including IE with Windows, so that computer manufacturers/retailers and/or consumers can choose the best web browser for their need.
That's not Microsoft's problem, is it? Does GM even give the option to include an after-market Momo suspension system? No, they leave it up to the consumer who for the most part, would not buy such a thing for his new GM vehicle because it already includes an adequate suspension system.
Why does the fact that it's software make any difference? It's competition, that's the point.
Capitalism is not and never will be a perfect world, but it's the "American Way", "Love it or Leave it"...
AOL version 7.0 still uses IE. My point is MS is a company. They happen to make an OS and Web Browser that work hand-in-hand. Just like Ford makes a car with Air Conditioning.
If AOL/Time/Warner/Netscape/Bob/Uncle-Ted wants to compete with that, Netscape had better come up with an OS!
Windows XP includes a lite zip/unzip utility. Is Winzip going to sue? The fact that MS is a software company should allow them to include whatever they want in their OS, not cater to the weaker competitor. That's not what capitalism is about!
I thought Americans would see that. BTW, I have been using Mozilla under Debian Potato for over a year, and I know it doesn't mean squat.
Isn't there some sort of limitation on how many people can sue a person/company (same thing in the US) for the same thing?
This crap against Microsoft is getting old. If people didn't want to use IE on most WIN32 PCs, and programmers didn't want to code for IE, there's nothing stopping them from using something else.
After all, Microsoft as a company that makes both an OS ans a Web-browser (which happens to be fully integrated with the OS). Who's to say they have to give the option to package the OS with someone else's browser?
Isn't that like GM being forced to give the option to include either their own air-conditioning system, or one from Ford!
Stupid Canadian side-note:Is sueing someone the only way to compete in the American market? Seems to me like the new "American-Way", is to sue someone today!
The odds of ANYTHING happening are 100%. The odds of anything NOT happening are also 100%.
The odds of someone attempting to analyze the probability of an event and succeding OR failing, are also 100%.
Try and extrapolate the Uncertainty Principle. Black holes even among the smallest order have a gravitational pull that will distort the very fabric of space-time and yet...particles still escape.
Why? because anything that can happen will, and anything that can't...still will. Even the laws of physics are just a set of observations.
And I disagree, "Given the following results of flipping a coin, what is the probability that the next flip will be a H:
HHHHHHHHHHH"
100%. Same thing for T, 100%. My point is, you can't know this before flipping the coin! Just like you can't know the path of a photon until you observe it. By doing so, you've effectively altered that path.
The problem with trying to rule the world by buying it is...who's selling?
Albeit the devil wants you to buy the world from him, but the concept it the same. If no one gets hooked on Gate's vision of an MS World, what does he have left?
Here's what I think drives the consumer PC and Software markets...
People go with what they know.
Of the 4.whatever% of the market share that owns Apple Computer, I would bet 90% of them use or have used an Apple as part of their job or education.
The 80something% of users who run Windows at home, at some point have used Windows at work or school as well.
The history behind this is plain to everyone who has been in the industry for awhile, or saw Pirates of Silicon Valley. Simply put: When the market needed a business platform, IBM and Microsoft were there and Apple was too busy with the home-market. When the market needed a home platform, Microsoft was there again and Apple was...somewhere else.
Point being, it does not matter what the middle-class consumer wants or needs. It doesn't matter who makes the best PC or OS. It doesn't matter which products in any category is the newest, coolest, or least expensive.
It matters that people are creatures of habit, and will use what they know.
While I absolutely despise the approach Microsoft takes toward software development, I can safely say they won't ever get "absolute control" over it. I'm not trying to sound smug, but what exactly doesn't everyone like about the way they operate? I mean, every time I turn around there's another Linux kernel being released, and that's with hundreds of developers working on it and everyone and his best-freind's *dog* giving input! Microsoft may be a lot of things but error-prone is notone of them. Go to Microsoft's HCL page for example. They offer support for more devices than I can fathom and continue to support those devices even years after the vendor stops manufacturing them! Microsoft has only themselves as input, and a service-pack or an automated update for security or additional features every now and then is nothing compared to having to re-compile your own kernel each time a developer who cannot even be held accountable for his mistakes changes his mind and re-writes a VM or something! That's the Linux way Don't get me wrong, I love Linux. But only because I love to tinker with things.
When did Microsoft stop porting it's OS's for other CPUs anyways? I was running NT4.0 on a RISC processor (don't ask which one, I only operated the thing) and the thing hauled ass. I know it can run pretty hot an an AS/400.
I suppose it's because they sleep with Intel though, just like my company sleeps with IBM.
Were this experiment conducted in conjunction with one measuring the quantum entaglement of those particles in the medium used to "store" the light, I wonder what effect it would have on the spin of the particles on the other end?
A little simpler: a) Quantum entangle the Rb particles (or some of them) with those at a distance. Observe spin.
b) perform this experiment (the one used to "store" light).
c) Observe the spin of the remote particles.
Any change? This would further explain the effects of Quantum Entanglement because not only would the spin of those particles not included in the experiment theoretically change, but one would know it wasn't a change caused by observation alone.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, we developed all of our applications from scratch. These banking applications are not part of or use any part of a shrink-wrapped application. We even write the APIs for these.
So the figures are based on development time. Some of our applications are easily portable. We know this since we recently converted from OS/2 to Windows 2000 (client-side) and several applications were ported over while others had to be completely re-written.
As for old, our applications are generally as old as our bank (10+ years) and have only been updated or re-written when changes were made on the client, server or host side, or when changes in regulations required it.
So unlike most organizations which only use shrik-wrapped applications like Office, Banks, Governments and the like only use these apps as tools which can easily be changed. The core of Merril Lynch's infrastructure, like that of my own company, is dependant on much more specialized applications, mission critical stuff.
Without these programs people like you and I would have no access to our money, that's why I say it takes balls.
I work for one of the largest banks in the world (Top 5) and we almost ditched our entire Windows Server infrastructure in favor of Linux. Why? Not because it wasn't working.
Unlike a lot of MS haters, we know how to use Windows. Strangely enough, when used the way MS intended it works pretty well.
Instead we considered Linux for similar reasons as Merril Lynch. When we asked MS for a deal on licencing our 300+ Windows 2000 Servers the way they did for Windows NT4.0, not only did they say "No" they auditted our current licences and told use we owe them money! They were the ones who sold us the licences in the first place!
So on top of each Windows 2000 Server licence, they want client access licences for EVERY computer (6000+) and a yearly subscription fee for god knows what!
I mean, what's the point of a server if no one can access it? Per-seat licencing for 6000+ workstations?
It wasn't until we weighed it against the cost of redeveloping 120 applications for Linux that we decided to cave. MS knows this. They waited for companies to become dependant on their OS before jacking up the price. What Merril Lynch is doing is not whoop-de-doo! another company went to Linux!, it's truly amazing. For such an enormous organization to revamp on such a huge scale takes cahones.
I like the idea of simple designs which may have the ability to evolve on their own, if in a somewhat accelerated (by design) manner, far more than simply designing a machine that performs a human task so well but not much else, such as expert machines.
/. a year or so ago...(sorry, I couln't find it)
Not that expert machines don't have their place in the world, for the most part they have improved things in the world. But I think it's dangerous to design human-like machines when the intent is to enslave them.
I mean, isn't the ultimate goal of AI research to create Intelligence? Do we really plan to enslave that intelligence as well?
I wrote an email to Ray Kurzweil once posing this question to him and he agreed that unfortunately, it's still called Artificial Intelligence but I would assume this is because people are so hard to convince. As for enslaving them I think it's a matter of funding.
People are willing to spend money on machines who will do all of their work for them but would be less likely to fork it over if they were told the machines would just be, and not work for the man.
That's why I like Brooks. Why try and replicate the design of the most complicated peice of machinery evolution ever invented when you can create simpler beings? Lower the bar a little and I bet we could create truly amazing machines that aren't human in any way.
Kind of like that agent program that was featured in
These programs were given the ability to post to an IRC channel and also retrieve the messages without any human intervention. They started communicating with each other (there were 4 I beleive) in a way that the designers could not interpret at all!
I say design a machine with the BIOS to control itself (say RAM, HDD, Limbs, sensors etc...) and a few protocol stacks at it's disposal for developing communication abilities. The CPU could be a neural-net or series of FPGAs, something that could alter itself based on evolutionary algorithms and the instruction set could be...nothing!
Let it figure itself out the way human babies do! Sure, several will destroy themselves in some way but I think eventually, one would start to figure things out on it's own.
I don't know, just another crazy, crack-induced dream I guess...
My coworker lost the licence key for his copy of Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional.
Instead of borrowing a CD-Key from a freind, our employer or finding one on the Internet, he called Microsoft. He found the 1-800 # on their website (Customer Service, I beleive) and although he was transferred twice in the conversation, they readily supplied him with another valid CD-Key.
No questions, no validation or Proof of Purchace, they just gave it to him over the phone!
Two months later, he had to reinstall again (he messes around in the registry too much) and had forgotten where he placed the CD-Key. He called them again and without question they gave him another CD-Key!
If the most evil company in the world can do this for a customer, why can't the companies who sell CDs? DVDs? Hell, even books for that matter!
I can't beleive a single American Citizen still beleives he or she is being represented in the government...
I'm Canadian and even from our second-hand American media most Canadians know the American Government only represents 2 parties, Itself and Large Corporations.
The government is a business just like any other and all it cares about is money.
I know we watch about 1% of the night-sky for in-bound meteors/comets/etc... which may run the risk of colliding with the Earth, but do we watch the sky for object which could destroy the moon?
I know it's extremely unlikely but, what would happen if the moon were suddenly destroyed? Wouldn't that be nearly as bad as a direct hit with the Earth?
Think about it; no tidal pull to dictate the oceans would mean a serious disruption to the weather systems, possibly even the planet's rotation! I would think a direct hit could be almost a good thing by comparison. After all, it would mean no more BS like this...
Days later...
/. Linux people on this point for months and it seems to be getting worse. First Lunix was just a good OS, then it was the best OS, then all other OSes were pitiful... you get the point. They seem to think the Industry Standards are something they can rewrite as they see fit. Don't get me wrong, I love Linux. I just think the Linux community has forgotten what they set out to do in the first place.
Good post by the way. I have been fighting the
BTW, did you know Windows NT/2000/XP is a POSIX compliant OS? No BS. I haven't been able to run any POSIX software on any of them but it's in the white papers (not that it means anything).
Peaces.
I work in an entry level technical position. Even though my expertise and experience is much greater than that which is required for my job, I took it because hey, the market sucked and I have a family to feed.
The company I work for is very large and very stable. It's a bank, and even when the tech market "adjusted", the overall impact on my company was negligible.
So I do my job to the best of my ability, which is far better than most in my department, and for the most part I am recognized by being granted more responsibility and more say in the things that happen in the organization. I was even given the opportunity to coordinate the largest, fastest rollout the company has ever seen.
3600 Windows 2000 PCs across 120 locations, installed and configured by out-sourced techs who have no idea what our systems or proprietary applications are like, all completed in less than 8 weeks and me as the only single point of contact for all of the techs. I put out about 50 fires per night ranging from Server issues to Network outages and not once did a location have to fall back...not once.
I was told that it would be my ticket, my way out of my current boring, mindless position as a first-level support person.
I did well, better than anyone expected. I rarely escalated any problems past the point of a phone call. The entire project was called, "the most successful project in the company's history." One week later the company went through a massive re-org and where am I now?
Still changing passwords and asking retards to reboot when an application hangs on them. I attend the occasional meeting where my valued input counts towards the benefit of other departments and still sees me in the same place I have been for over 2 years.
So why do I hate my job?
Because no matter how many times I am commended for my excellent work, how many times my manager receives emails from our users that I went "above and beyond", no matter how many times my suggestion in a meeting gets implemented in the next production release, etc...
I am still in the same entry level position. I give this company everything it needs and more, and I get sweet fuck all. That's why I hate my job...
"monopoly Pronunciation Key (m-np-l)
/. community would realize that. Whether or not they use monopolistic practices is subjective. Of course if you were one of the companies forced out of business this is definitely the outlook (no pun intended).
n. pl. monopolies
Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service: "Monopoly frequently... arises from government support or from collusive agreements among individuals" (Milton Friedman).
Law. A right granted by a government giving exclusive control over a specified commercial activity to a single party.
A company or group having exclusive control over a commercial activity.
A commodity or service so controlled.
Exclusive possession or control: arrogantly claims to have a monopoly on the truth.
Something that is exclusively possessed or controlled: showed that scientific achievement is not a male monopoly."
Take an economics course or something. This is not what Microsoft hold over the industry. Having options for other OS, even free options, means they do not Monopolize. I wish the
They are however, what Microsoft is part of (in the OS market anyways) is an Oligopoly:
"oligopoly:
A market dominated by a small number of participants who are able to collectively exert control over supply and market prices."
I don't care what anyone says, if they aren't the only company selling OSes, they aren't a monopoly.
You should know better than to trust the law for anything...
WTF was that!
Who's in charge of Acronyms around here? It's not an SMTP problem!
Imagine a Beowolf...!!!
sigh, it's not easy being Troll.
Doesn't Windows XP's Hibernate feature do exactly this?
I run WinNT using Checkpoint Firewall-1 as the PC connected directly to the Internet. I watch my own packet logs pretty closely since I was the victim of a pretty talented hacker last year. From my logs it just looks like one PC always connected to the Internet, not the 5 behind it.
Now I can't even get in from the outside, how the hell are they planning on doing it?
Are they going to break into my house?
Here comes the "offtopic" moderation...
/. effect can now be classified as a DoS attack.
/. is Anti-Microsoft, Anti-Intel, Anti-any-sort-of-establishment.
I tried to access the site but could not. The
From the posts below I have extrapolated that
I mean, the points are valid. But doesn't anyone care that Intel has proved their chips are far more reliable under heat-emergencies than the AMD CPUs?
Yes, the Palomino has improved on this but it's like buying a car. Sure a Porshe Boxster is fast, and costs a fraction of the 911. But which car is a proven vehicle?
No, my analogy holds true because instead of whining about GM killing competition, companies who wish to compete do so on GM's terms.
When Ford introduced mass-production to the vehicle manufacturing world, the other companies had no choice but to compete on their terms. Same thing with MS.
If Netscape can't hold their own against MS in the browser market because MS has it integrated into their OS, either make an OS that includes Netscape or get the fuck out of Dodge! You people don't seem to understand you are questioning the very principles of Capitalism.
If you cannot compete against the giants, don't play the game.
And besides, Netscape sucks ass. I use it for my Debian because it's the only decent browser I could find. If I had the time to use IE5 for UNIX on it, I would.
What some people suggest, though, is that Microsoft stop including IE with Windows, so that computer manufacturers/retailers and/or consumers can choose the best web browser for their need.
That's not Microsoft's problem, is it? Does GM even give the option to include an after-market Momo suspension system? No, they leave it up to the consumer who for the most part, would not buy such a thing for his new GM vehicle because it already includes an adequate suspension system.
Why does the fact that it's software make any difference? It's competition, that's the point.
Capitalism is not and never will be a perfect world, but it's the "American Way", "Love it or Leave it"...
AOL version 7.0 still uses IE. My point is MS is a company. They happen to make an OS and Web Browser that work hand-in-hand. Just like Ford makes a car with Air Conditioning.
If AOL/Time/Warner/Netscape/Bob/Uncle-Ted wants to compete with that, Netscape had better come up with an OS!
Windows XP includes a lite zip/unzip utility. Is Winzip going to sue? The fact that MS is a software company should allow them to include whatever they want in their OS, not cater to the weaker competitor. That's not what capitalism is about !
I thought Americans would see that.
BTW, I have been using Mozilla under Debian Potato for over a year, and I know it doesn't mean squat.
Isn't there some sort of limitation on how many people can sue a person/company (same thing in the US) for the same thing ?
This crap against Microsoft is getting old. If people didn't want to use IE on most WIN32 PCs, and programmers didn't want to code for IE, there's nothing stopping them from using something else.
After all, Microsoft as a company that makes both an OS ans a Web-browser (which happens to be fully integrated with the OS). Who's to say they have to give the option to package the OS with someone else's browser?
Isn't that like GM being forced to give the option to include either their own air-conditioning system, or one from Ford!
Stupid Canadian side-note:Is sueing someone the only way to compete in the American market? Seems to me like the new "American-Way", is to sue someone today!
You probability experts drive me crazy.
The odds of ANYTHING happening are 100%. The odds of anything NOT happening are also 100%.
The odds of someone attempting to analyze the probability of an event and succeding OR failing, are also 100%.
Try and extrapolate the Uncertainty Principle. Black holes even among the smallest order have a gravitational pull that will distort the very fabric of space-time and yet...particles still escape.
Why? because anything that can happen will, and anything that can't...still will. Even the laws of physics are just a set of observations.
And I disagree, "Given the following results of flipping a coin, what is the probability that the next flip will be a H:
HHHHHHHHHHH"
100%. Same thing for T, 100%. My point is, you can't know this before flipping the coin! Just like you can't know the path of a photon until you observe it. By doing so, you've effectively altered that path.
Any prediction is made bias by the observation...
The problem with trying to rule the world by buying it is...who's selling?
Albeit the devil wants you to buy the world from him, but the concept it the same. If no one gets hooked on Gate's vision of an MS World, what does he have left?
Here's what I think drives the consumer PC and Software markets...
People go with what they know.
Of the 4.whatever% of the market share that owns Apple Computer, I would bet 90% of them use or have used an Apple as part of their job or education.
The 80something% of users who run Windows at home, at some point have used Windows at work or school as well.
The history behind this is plain to everyone who has been in the industry for awhile, or saw Pirates of Silicon Valley. Simply put: When the market needed a business platform, IBM and Microsoft were there and Apple was too busy with the home-market. When the market needed a home platform, Microsoft was there again and Apple was...somewhere else.
Point being, it does not matter what the middle-class consumer wants or needs. It doesn't matter who makes the best PC or OS. It doesn't matter which products in any category is the newest, coolest, or least expensive.
It matters that people are creatures of habit, and will use what they know.
While I absolutely despise the approach Microsoft takes toward software development, I can safely say they won't ever get "absolute control" over it.
I'm not trying to sound smug, but what exactly doesn't everyone like about the way they operate?
I mean, every time I turn around there's another Linux kernel being released, and that's with hundreds of developers working on it and everyone and his best-freind's *dog* giving input!
Microsoft may be a lot of things but error-prone is notone of them.
Go to Microsoft's HCL page for example. They offer support for more devices than I can fathom and continue to support those devices even years after the vendor stops manufacturing them!
Microsoft has only themselves as input, and a service-pack or an automated update for security or additional features every now and then is nothing compared to having to re-compile your own kernel each time a developer who cannot even be held accountable for his mistakes changes his mind and re-writes a VM or something! That's the Linux way
Don't get me wrong, I love Linux. But only because I love to tinker with things.
When did Microsoft stop porting it's OS's for other CPUs anyways? I was running NT4.0 on a RISC processor (don't ask which one, I only operated the thing) and the thing hauled ass. I know it can run pretty hot an an AS/400.
I suppose it's because they sleep with Intel though, just like my company sleeps with IBM.
Stupid OS/2s!
Were this experiment conducted in conjunction with one measuring the quantum entaglement of those particles in the medium used to "store" the light, I wonder what effect it would have on the spin of the particles on the other end?
A little simpler: a) Quantum entangle the Rb particles (or some of them) with those at a distance. Observe spin.
b) perform this experiment (the one used to "store" light).
c) Observe the spin of the remote particles.
Any change? This would further explain the effects of Quantum Entanglement because not only would the spin of those particles not included in the experiment theoretically change, but one would know it wasn't a change caused by observation alone.