Part of this is certainly related to how they are handled. Boxes obviously containing computers are thrown several feet and land harshly on a conveyor belt. Imagine picking up your computer and your monitor and throwing them as hard as you can against the wall. This happens... hundreds of times a night. Any item shipped through UPS will probably be handled at least 8 to 10 times, and each time it will go through the same level of treatment.
Why doesn't this surprise me? Because the company I used to work for shipped a computer from AZ to my office in MI. The clueless moron who shipped it packed it in a box that was filled only with shredded paper.
When it arrived, this thing looked like someone had played football with it. Both the CPU and monitor case had been broken/cracked...the monitors case had a hole big enough to stuff three fingers in!! It was a frickin' miracle this equipment worked at all!
The question is, though, do you want to replace what that system is MEANT to run with Linux?
I dunno. Why don't you ask Mac users running Linux PPC? (Macs are MEANT to run MacOS, I don't think ANYONE will argue that point...) One might even say that x86-based PCs were meant to run MS-DOS (the original IBM PC architecture, which ALL modern x86 desktops are derived from was very much designed around PC-DOS.)
Lets suppose that a company exists that can only differentiate itself from its competitors by the intellectual property in its software. While its hardware and service are good, they aren't overwhelmingly compelling, and the only way they can make money is to sell software because its good software and people use it.
Microsoft...
Sun doesn't want to open source their code. And they won't. They want people to build products using their intellectual property, and then pay them for it. In a tech world where it makes more sense to liscence a piece of the puzzle instead of doing your own, Sun is trying to get in on the sale of IP thing.
They want people (community) to work for them for FREE soi they can make money. Doesn't this seem unfair to you?
Sun is no different from MS except that they are making themselves seem like they are supporting the community when they are really just out to kill MS through less than honerable tactics. They don't want to alienate the OSS community so they make it seem like they like us. They are wolves in sheep's clothing...
.... and it is a really good program if it is executed right.
I've been told by some people that out West, UoP's requtation is better since they have been around for 25 years there...
The main problem is not the program or the course content, or even the faculty, who is required to work full-time in the fields they teach, but with the administration...it is impossible to get a hold of people sometimes and there are far too few counselors available as compared to the number of students. Faculty and students quit on a fairly regular basis because the administration is so bad...I'm likely to get my BS from UoP and then move to Central Michigan, which offers a Masters program for information technology in a similar format....
The sessions are 5-8 weeks long, 4 hours a week (one session per week). You also are required to be in a study group, which meets for a couple hours a week to complete group assignments (this is how you get the minimum # of hours and still be accredited)
It qualifies for loan purposes as "full time" enrollment status, too.
Depends on the speed of the CPU and particularly the data bus. On most PC hardware, even direct memory transfers aren't THAT fast. You need the speed in the I/O bus which is even slower....you simply wouldn't NEED that much bandwidth.
Right...not unlike modems except on a phone line there is a very limited number of sine waves that can be fit and there amplitude and frequency are quite limited...early modems were 110 bps, then 300 then faster...the max speed of the medium never changed (POTS are limited to 33,600 bps) only the encoding techniques changed...
WHERE CAN I FIND THE DOCUMENTATION ON THESE CURSED 'SIGNALS' I KEEP HEARING ABOUT? WHERE'S THE MAN PAGE? WHERE'S THE RFC? WHERE'S THE FAQ??? I'M TRYING TO RTFM!!!!
I was listening to Drew and Mike, a local radio morning show on WRIF in Detroit, and discovered this book, which is supposed to be all about these 'signals', but I have yet to pick up this book... Anyone else read it/has it worked for them/etc.?
Now that privacy issues are getting more and more press, the time is ripe for a cartoony privacy mascot. Companies can attach his picture to their products if their software doesn't reveal or track any user info. I'm gonna suggest 'Peter, the Privacy Panda.' Maybe he can hang out with Smokey the Bear and McGruff.
You've obviously been watching too much South Park lately:) (For those who don't have Comedy Central: they had an episode featuring sexual harassment, which featured, among other things the "Sexual Harassment Panda" along with various stupid mascots that didn't make sense.)
Excel also used Microsoft routines/system calls which the competition could not use because they were not documented. Definitely taking advantage of writing the OS and the application. Did Lotus sue or merely complain? There was quite a fuss about that.
Excel on Windows did, yes. But Excel was first introduced on the Macintosh.
I used one on an Apple II (I think the mouse was from Mouse Systems). Just a normal serial connection.
While I don't doubt that you did, I would have to wonder about when this mouse came out. The Microsoft serial mouse was introduced around 1984.
The first Microsoft mouse was a joke with a large metal "pinball" for the roller (no good traction). Also it required an ISA card.
The first Microsoft mouse did require an ISA (bus) card, but the second was a serial mouse, and it was the first such mouse, according to Stephen Manes and Paul Andrews' excellent unauthorized biography on Bill Gates.
Most of those people even paid for these programs but MS (illegally) added code to Windows 3.1 to make it claim incompatibility with anything other than MS DOS, forcing people to switch. Go buy a copy of Undocumented DOS if you don't believe me.
As a former user of DesqView and DR-DOS, I would have to agree to some extent. DR-DOS did run, but was not 100% compatible with Windows 3.1.
The Undocumented DOS bit does explain quite a few things. Basically, MS-DOS 5 and later actually know about Windows 3.1 and make accommodations when Windows 3.1 announced to it that it is loading. Other DOS operating systems, like DR-DOS, Compaq DOS, etc. didn't make these accomodations, so Windows 3.1 would present a BSOD warning message stating that it wasn't running on a compatible DOS operating system.
Other DOSes are also not compatible with Windows 9x for obvious reasons. (no LFN support, no FAT32 support)
Of course, this case doesn't cover these issues. It mostly revolves around Windows 9x and Internet Exploiter.
C'mon, lets be fair. As much as I dislike Microsoft Windows, as much as I dislike MS's predatory practices, as much as I dislike some of the really crappy things Microsoft has done, Microsoft did indeed have a few innovations, but not many.
When Microsoft introduced Excel, it was lightyears ahead of other spreadsheet programs of the time, including Lotus 1-2-3. Excel had things like WYSIWYG, background recalc, and other things that made the spreadsheet concept usable to people who never would have used Lotus 123, VisiCalc, etc.
The serial mouse was also invented at Microsoft. The serial mouse introduced a way of having an inexpensive mouse on the PC platform. Before the serial mouse, mice were far too expensive for the average user. Now you can pick one up for about $10. (Granted, this was done to sell more copies of Windoze, but still...:)
That's about I can think of, really. Microsoft's operating systems have always been pretty crappy, most of the new technologies that they develop are acquired through purchases, and much of what Microsoft does just generally sucks.
I'm sure thats what Jackson was thinking when he siad that "a price for Windows substantially above that which could be charged in a competitve market." The point you make the price of Windows not going down is valid: in fact, this point was brought up by Jackson himself in the trial (no I don't have a link, but I do remember reading about it on news.com)
Also note that other software prices, including Microsoft's own prices, have gone down with the industry. When Microsoft bundled all the applications together that make up Microsoft Office, they essentially lowered the price on word, excel, etc., in order to compete with its competition of the day (Lotus and WordPerfect). Now that Office dominates the market, the price of Office has actually gone up. (Office 97 is more expensive than Office 95 was, but I'm not sure if Office 2000 is more expensive than 97, but even if its the same price, my point has been made. Incidentally, Access used to be a $100 upgrade to Office, and now its a $200 upgrade)
Except that it costs more... Microsoft needs this two tiered pricing structure to bring in more revenue. One product that is priced towards consumers and one that will be sold to businesses- who are willing to pay more $$$. (this is not a rant or anything... simply true)
Well, MSFT will actually be offering an "upgrade" price for existing Windows 98 users (I think $175 or something) but you're right: the two-tiered system is designed to generate more revenue.
The judge ruled, as a finding of fact, that Microsoft is a monopoly and has maintained that monopoly through anti-competitive behaviour that resulted in collateral damage to customers, consumers, and third parties.
Yet this is only a finding of fact, and not yet a legal victory. There will be another round of the trial where punishment is to be decided. Microsoft will have to prove that they although they have a monopoly, they don't deserve punishment because they didn't abuse it in an illegal manner.
Plus this will help the Caldera case (even though Dr. DOS took place before the events covered in the document).
Caldera's case is kind of on shakey ground, IMHO, because they didn't own DR-DOS during a time where it would have mattered. They bought DR-DOS only after it was fairly clear that DR-DOS wasn't a viable product anymore. But #include <ianal_disclaimer.h>
1) Companies use netscape on all their UNIX boxes. 2) Companies use netscape on all their Win95 boxes. IE wasn't free when the majority of companies purchased their licenses, and Netscape continues to dominate the market share in the commercial sector, which is roughly twice the size of the personal or private sector.(After all, everyone who works in virtually any white collar job has at least one machine they have at work, but not all of them have PCs at home.
You're missing something key here: the Web is increasingly become a consumer mainstay. what companies have at work will only be relevant for business-to-business transactions. The consumer has traditionally ruled the markets. Look at how hardware companies have twisted themselves into a pretzel to attract the first time consumer buyer.
I used to publish several magazines/newspapers for various non-profit disability groups, such as the Paralzyed Veterans of America, and for the most part I agree. I also tend to be somewhat conservative...but still, I think there is a real need for people with disabilities to have access to the Web.
One reason is that the Internet is becoming a necessity. Already, it is almost a prerequisite to have an e-mail address to get a tech job. When I was job hunting last, virtually every potential employer wanted my e-mail address (some still e-mail me:)
However, there are a few things to keep in mind. That clause in the Fededral agency guidelines about 'undue burden' applies to businesses well. If you look at the DOJ's ADA Guidelines, which I'm sure are on the DOJ's Web page somewhere.
What this generally boils down to is that, in general, this will not affect small businesses. Its not hard to prove 'undue burden' in these cases. In AOL's case, it probably is. In fact, AOL will probably lose. A good example is the DOJ case about the MCI Center (in Washington, D.C., home of the Washington Capitols) where the DOJ and the PVA successfully sued the large architectural firm that designed the stadium (the name escapes me at the moment) because there were no sightlines for people in wheelchairs over standing spectators. Most ADA cases are usually won, especially if the DOJ is involved. But in the case of small business, typically the DOJ doesn't prosecute cases where buildings may not be 100% accessible (esp. older/smaller buildings), so your small online business may be partially safe from prosecution. However, there are lots of cases where the DOJ does prosecute small business, especially if changes are easy to make (like installing ramps or handicap parking spaces)
However, there are certain cases which I can't agree with, despite my support of disability rights in general. One is where the DOJ and other groups are trying to sue owners of stadium-seat movie megaplexes that are popping up in major metropolitan cities (the Star Southfield Entertainment Center in Southfield, MI comes to mind). The complaint in these cases is that wheelchair users aren't afforded the "best seats in the house" because wheelchair users can only sit at either the bottom or the very top. It could easily be argued that forcing these owners to install expensive elevators in every auditorium is 'undue burden' especially since these owners have to compete with other theatres on price to some extent, and the laws wouldn't require these owners to install the elevators (since they dont' have stadium-style seating)
For the most part, though, I'm in favor of disability rights. I think the Web, along with everything else, should be made accessible for all people. But we have to pick our battles wisely.
Slashdot Mirror
Part of this is certainly related to how they are handled. Boxes obviously containing computers are thrown several feet and land harshly on a conveyor belt. Imagine picking up your computer and your monitor and throwing them as hard as you can against the wall. This happens... hundreds of times a night. Any item shipped through UPS will probably be handled at least 8 to 10 times, and each time it will go through the same level of treatment.
Why doesn't this surprise me? Because the company I used to work for shipped a computer from AZ to my office in MI. The clueless moron who shipped it packed it in a box that was filled only with shredded paper.
When it arrived, this thing looked like someone had played football with it. Both the CPU and monitor case had been broken/cracked...the monitors case had a hole big enough to stuff three fingers in!! It was a frickin' miracle this equipment worked at all!
Of course, this exploit would only work with OSCAR, which is AIM's main server, which uses binary.
However, the Linux clients TiK and gAIM speak to TOC, which is an ASCII-based gateway to OSCAR. What prevents MSNM from talking to TOC?
The question is, though, do you want to replace what that system is MEANT to run with Linux?
I dunno. Why don't you ask Mac users running Linux PPC? (Macs are MEANT to run MacOS, I don't think ANYONE will argue that point...) One might even say that x86-based PCs were meant to run MS-DOS (the original IBM PC architecture, which ALL modern x86 desktops are derived from was very much designed around PC-DOS.)
The largest corporation in the wold uses it if thats enough reason...
Lets suppose that a company exists that can only differentiate itself from its competitors by the intellectual property in its software. While its hardware and service are good, they aren't overwhelmingly compelling, and the only way they can make money is to sell software because its good software and people use it.
Microsoft...
Sun doesn't want to open source their code. And they won't. They want people to build products using their intellectual property, and then pay them for it. In a tech world where it makes more sense to liscence a piece of the puzzle instead of doing your own, Sun is trying to get in on the sale of IP thing.
They want people (community) to work for them for FREE soi they can make money. Doesn't this seem unfair to you?
Sun is no different from MS except that they are making themselves seem like they are supporting the community when they are really just out to kill MS through less than honerable tactics. They don't want to alienate the OSS community so they make it seem like they like us. They are wolves in sheep's clothing...
That's not true. My employer has been very supportive of my seeking my degree. They would MUCH rather see me with a degree than without one.
.... and it is a really good program if it is executed right.
I've been told by some people that out West, UoP's requtation is better since they have been around for 25 years there...
The main problem is not the program or the course content, or even the faculty, who is required to work full-time in the fields they teach, but with the administration...it is impossible to get a hold of people sometimes and there are far too few counselors available as compared to the number of students. Faculty and students quit on a fairly regular basis because the administration is so bad...I'm likely to get my BS from UoP and then move to Central Michigan, which offers a Masters program for information technology in a similar format....
The sessions are 5-8 weeks long, 4 hours a week (one session per week). You also are required to be in a study group, which meets for a couple hours a week to complete group assignments (this is how you get the minimum # of hours and still be accredited)
It qualifies for loan purposes as "full time" enrollment status, too.
not all conservatives are lassez-faire entirely... some prominent conservatives are quite in favor of the antitrust lawsuit against MS...
Depends on the speed of the CPU and particularly the data bus. On most PC hardware, even direct memory transfers aren't THAT fast. You need the speed in the I/O bus which is even slower....you simply wouldn't NEED that much bandwidth.
yup...99% of all cable is carrying analog waves, which makes it a cable modem (MODulator/DEModulator)
Right...not unlike modems except on a phone line there is a very limited number of sine waves that can be fit and there amplitude and frequency are quite limited...early modems were 110 bps, then 300 then faster...the max speed of the medium never changed (POTS are limited to 33,600 bps) only the encoding techniques changed ...
Excel was released in 1985 for the Apple Macintosh
I said use only open source software. This would exclude the use Win 9x/NT
WHERE CAN I FIND THE DOCUMENTATION ON THESE CURSED 'SIGNALS' I KEEP HEARING ABOUT? WHERE'S THE MAN PAGE? WHERE'S THE RFC? WHERE'S THE FAQ??? I'M TRYING TO RTFM!!!!
I was listening to Drew and Mike, a local radio morning show on WRIF in Detroit, and discovered this book, which is supposed to be all about these 'signals', but I have yet to pick up this book... Anyone else read it/has it worked for them/etc.?
Now that privacy issues are getting more and more press, the time is ripe for a cartoony privacy mascot. Companies can attach his picture to their products if their software doesn't reveal or track any user info. I'm gonna suggest 'Peter, the Privacy Panda.' Maybe he can hang out with Smokey the Bear and McGruff.
:) (For those who don't have Comedy Central: they had an episode featuring sexual harassment, which featured, among other things the "Sexual Harassment Panda" along with various stupid mascots that didn't make sense.)
You've obviously been watching too much South Park lately
Use only Open Source software. You will never have to worry about pirating software again.
Excel also used Microsoft routines/system calls which the competition could not use because they were not documented. Definitely taking advantage of writing the OS and the application. Did Lotus sue or merely complain? There was quite a fuss about that.
Excel on Windows did, yes. But Excel was first introduced on the Macintosh.
I used one on an Apple II (I think the mouse was from Mouse Systems). Just a normal serial connection.
While I don't doubt that you did, I would have to wonder about when this mouse came out. The Microsoft serial mouse was introduced around 1984.
The first Microsoft mouse was a joke with a large metal "pinball" for the roller (no good traction). Also it required an ISA card.
The first Microsoft mouse did require an ISA (bus) card, but the second was a serial mouse, and it was the first such mouse, according to Stephen Manes and Paul Andrews' excellent unauthorized biography on Bill Gates.
Most of those people even paid for these programs but MS (illegally) added code to Windows 3.1 to make it claim incompatibility with anything other than MS DOS, forcing people to switch. Go buy a copy of Undocumented DOS if you don't believe me.
As a former user of DesqView and DR-DOS, I would have to agree to some extent. DR-DOS did run, but was not 100% compatible with Windows 3.1.
The Undocumented DOS bit does explain quite a few things. Basically, MS-DOS 5 and later actually know about Windows 3.1 and make accommodations when Windows 3.1 announced to it that it is loading. Other DOS operating systems, like DR-DOS, Compaq DOS, etc. didn't make these accomodations, so Windows 3.1 would present a BSOD warning message stating that it wasn't running on a compatible DOS operating system.
Other DOSes are also not compatible with Windows 9x for obvious reasons. (no LFN support, no FAT32 support)
Of course, this case doesn't cover these issues. It mostly revolves around Windows 9x and Internet Exploiter.
C'mon, lets be fair. As much as I dislike Microsoft Windows, as much as I dislike MS's predatory practices, as much as I dislike some of the really crappy things Microsoft has done, Microsoft did indeed have a few innovations, but not many.
:)
When Microsoft introduced Excel, it was lightyears ahead of other spreadsheet programs of the time, including Lotus 1-2-3. Excel had things like WYSIWYG, background recalc, and other things that made the spreadsheet concept usable to people who never would have used Lotus 123, VisiCalc, etc.
The serial mouse was also invented at Microsoft. The serial mouse introduced a way of having an inexpensive mouse on the PC platform. Before the serial mouse, mice were far too expensive for the average user. Now you can pick one up for about $10. (Granted, this was done to sell more copies of Windoze, but still...
That's about I can think of, really. Microsoft's operating systems have always been pretty crappy, most of the new technologies that they develop are acquired through purchases, and much of what Microsoft does just generally sucks.
I'm sure thats what Jackson was thinking when he siad that "a price for Windows substantially above that which could be charged in a competitve market." The point you make the price of Windows not going down is valid: in fact, this point was brought up by Jackson himself in the trial (no I don't have a link, but I do remember reading about it on news.com)
Also note that other software prices, including Microsoft's own prices, have gone down with the industry. When Microsoft bundled all the applications together that make up Microsoft Office, they essentially lowered the price on word, excel, etc., in order to compete with its competition of the day (Lotus and WordPerfect). Now that Office dominates the market, the price of Office has actually gone up. (Office 97 is more expensive than Office 95 was, but I'm not sure if Office 2000 is more expensive than 97, but even if its the same price, my point has been made. Incidentally, Access used to be a $100 upgrade to Office, and now its a $200 upgrade)
Except that it costs more... Microsoft needs this two tiered pricing structure to bring in more revenue. One product that is priced towards consumers and one that will be sold to businesses- who are willing to pay more $$$. (this is not a rant or anything... simply true)
Well, MSFT will actually be offering an "upgrade" price for existing Windows 98 users (I think $175 or something) but you're right: the two-tiered system is designed to generate more revenue.
The judge ruled, as a finding of fact, that Microsoft is a monopoly and has maintained that monopoly through anti-competitive behaviour that resulted in collateral damage to customers, consumers, and third parties.
Yet this is only a finding of fact, and not yet a legal victory. There will be another round of the trial where punishment is to be decided. Microsoft will have to prove that they although they have a monopoly, they don't deserve punishment because they didn't abuse it in an illegal manner.
Plus this will help the Caldera case (even though Dr. DOS took place before the events covered in the document).
Caldera's case is kind of on shakey ground, IMHO, because they didn't own DR-DOS during a time where it would have mattered. They bought DR-DOS only after it was fairly clear that DR-DOS wasn't a viable product anymore. But #include <ianal_disclaimer.h>
1) Companies use netscape on all their UNIX boxes.
2) Companies use netscape on all their Win95 boxes. IE wasn't free when the majority of companies purchased their licenses, and Netscape continues to dominate the market share in the commercial sector, which is roughly twice the size of the personal or private sector.(After all, everyone who works in virtually any white collar job has at least one machine they have at work, but not all of them have PCs at home.
You're missing something key here: the Web is increasingly become a consumer mainstay. what companies have at work will only be relevant for business-to-business transactions. The consumer has traditionally ruled the markets. Look at how hardware companies have twisted themselves into a pretzel to attract the first time consumer buyer.
We're not at war.
Tell that to Bill Gates.
I used to publish several magazines/newspapers for various non-profit disability groups, such as the Paralzyed Veterans of America, and for the most part I agree. I also tend to be somewhat conservative...but still, I think there is a real need for people with disabilities to have access to the Web.
:)
One reason is that the Internet is becoming a necessity. Already, it is almost a prerequisite to have an e-mail address to get a tech job. When I was job hunting last, virtually every potential employer wanted my e-mail address (some still e-mail me
However, there are a few things to keep in mind. That clause in the Fededral agency guidelines about 'undue burden' applies to businesses well. If you look at the DOJ's ADA Guidelines, which I'm sure are on the DOJ's Web page somewhere.
What this generally boils down to is that, in general, this will not affect small businesses. Its not hard to prove 'undue burden' in these cases. In AOL's case, it probably is. In fact, AOL will probably lose. A good example is the DOJ case about the MCI Center (in Washington, D.C., home of the Washington Capitols) where the DOJ and the PVA successfully sued the large architectural firm that designed the stadium (the name escapes me at the moment) because there were no sightlines for people in wheelchairs over standing spectators. Most ADA cases are usually won, especially if the DOJ is involved. But in the case of small business, typically the DOJ doesn't prosecute cases where buildings may not be 100% accessible (esp. older/smaller buildings), so your small online business may be partially safe from prosecution. However, there are lots of cases where the DOJ does prosecute small business, especially if changes are easy to make (like installing ramps or handicap parking spaces)
However, there are certain cases which I can't agree with, despite my support of disability rights in general. One is where the DOJ and other groups are trying to sue owners of stadium-seat movie megaplexes that are popping up in major metropolitan cities (the Star Southfield Entertainment Center in Southfield, MI comes to mind). The complaint in these cases is that wheelchair users aren't afforded the "best seats in the house" because wheelchair users can only sit at either the bottom or the very top. It could easily be argued that forcing these owners to install expensive elevators in every auditorium is 'undue burden' especially since these owners have to compete with other theatres on price to some extent, and the laws wouldn't require these owners to install the elevators (since they dont' have stadium-style seating)
For the most part, though, I'm in favor of disability rights. I think the Web, along with everything else, should be made accessible for all people. But we have to pick our battles wisely.