'a kind of holy software grail,' to enable more or less normal Linux applications -- without requiring recompilation -- under Windows, Mac, or Linux, with a look and feel native to each. Just what i have been waiting for...
1. Ask for the president's office, and when connected, tell them that you refuse to do business with a company that is using a dubious law to squash competition!
2. Ask them why they don't feel that their product is a good enough value, that it will sell, without doing business in this manner!
3. Ask them what the procedure is for returning your Lexmark printer to them, since they did not make you aware, when you purchased the printer, that you would be forbidden buy law to use 3rd party replacement ink!
another good method to determine Linux compatibility is to search for "Linux and the model number of a laptop" that you are interested in, using Goggle
I agree 100%, I was only using the vehicle to show that even a statistically small amount of defects can have major consequences.
This was truly an amazing car, seeing as how it originally came off the assembly line with a Citation FWD drive train (used in the rear end) and a chevette front end. I am pretty sure back in those days each division had its own budget for vehicle development, This led to major fighting among the divisions, one of the best examples is the Pontiac Transport, Chevy refused to produce the vehicle and this was a major factor in its demise. GM eventually came to its senses and took control back from the individual divisions.
What if it was Pontiac Fiero. If I recall correctly, only 1 in a 1000 was catching fire. Hey, the total production of the Fiero was less that 350 thousand cars, so they only lost 350, no big deal right
The university that I attend supports zip 100's on every machine on campus. After spending years hating Iomega, the one product company, I am now completely dependent on them. I can store all the work for all of my classes on one disk and have, what is almost, the same access speed for my documents as a real hard drive.
An internal zip for the home machine is as cheap as 50 bucks at the local computer store and for the less technically savvy a usb zip 100 can be had for 85 bucks on sale.
Of course data loss is an even bigger issue with these things and I have found if you don't use the software eject feature there is a huge chance of corrupting data. Floppies do the same thing when you take the away from an application that is using them.
Clearly CDR-W's are the future but their time has not come yet masses and bandwidth costs for all those stolen mp3's and apps would be huge in a university setting.
As far as Network storage, how much are you going to give them? I have tried that method and 5megs is worthless. I would need at least 50 Megs to make it worthwhile to use, since I can carry 100 Megs on one disk right now.
Go for the one-product companies' solution, Its not going away and its not so bad being a Iomega Victim.
Here's good old James Rosini's page on the Kenyon & Kenyon.
In case the name does not ring a bell, This is the guy who signed the legal
paperwork that was sent to the Online Barcode Database. http://www.kenyonlaw.com/faboutus.htm
James Rosini
Well actually you will search for his page due to the way the
web site is set-up. lets send him a message,
I did.
This is my third attempt to get a response concerning your so call IP rights
to a piece of hardware that you freely and without restriction gave away. Now
it seems that your company is attempting try to claim some sort of contract
or ownership of this device and its output. Additionally you claim that use
of this device if governed by a document you call a EULA. 1. What does this
document have to do with this piece of hardware and why was I not informed about
this so called EULA when if received my cue cat from radio shack? 2. Using US
law as an example, explain to me how I can be held to an agreement, when the
existence of this agreement was never disclosed to me? I would like an answer
to the new and original questions, a lack of response to this second attempt
to contact your company will be taken as clear evidence that you do not possess
any documental IP rights to this device and are only engaged in a campaign to
harass legitimate users of these devices. Begin original message. As I would
like to release my own version of cue cat decoding software. 1. Please explain
to me exactly what is your IP interest in the cue cat and how does it apply
to US law? This so called IP interest is not mentioned at all on the web site
and was not explained in your recent letter to slashdot.org. 2. Additionally
are you saying that decoding or converting the output of a device that was sold
to me for 00.00 dollars and is now owned by me, illegal? thank you Jason W
Here's good old James Rosini's page on the Kenyon & Kenyon. In case the name does not ring a bell, This is the guy who signed the legal paperwork that was sent to the Online Barcode Database.http://www.kenyonlaw.com/faboutus.htm
Well actually you will search for his page due to the way the web site is set-up. lets send him a message, I did
This is my third attempt to get a response concerning your so call IP rights to a piece of hardware that you freely and without restriction gave away.
Now it seems that your company is attempting try to claim some sort of contract or ownership of this device and its output. Additionally you claim that use of this device if governed by a document you call a EULA.
1. What does this document have to do with this piece of hardware and why was I not informed about this so called EULA when if received my cue cat from radio shack? 2. Using US law as an example, explain to me how I can be held to an agreement, when the existence of this agreement was never disclosed to me?
I would like an answer to the new and original questions, a lack of response to this second attempt to contact your company will be taken as clear evidence that you do not possess any documental IP rights to this device and are only engaged in a campaign to harass legitimate users of these devices.
Begin original message.
As I would like to release my own version of cue cat decoding software.
1. Please explain to me exactly what is your IP interest in the cue cat and how does it apply to US law?
This so called IP interest is not mentioned at all on the web site and was not explained in your recent letter to slashdot.org.
2. Additionally are you saying that decoding or converting the output of a device that was sold to me for 00.00 dollars and is now owned by me, illegal?
thank you
Slashdot Mirror
'a kind of holy software grail,' to enable more or less normal Linux applications -- without requiring recompilation -- under Windows, Mac, or Linux, with a look and feel native to each.
Just what i have been waiting for...
http://www.radioshack.com/search/index.jsp?kwCatI
Real supports i-tunes and they are bad guys, but these guys are hero's!
Woops, that's right, this is Slashdot!
Like the telephone number to the main corporate office
Man Oh Man, just aint enough news to go around.
859-232-2000
1. Ask for the president's office, and when connected, tell them that you refuse to do business with a company that is using a dubious law to squash competition!
2. Ask them why they don't feel that their product is a good enough value, that it will sell, without doing business in this manner!
3. Ask them what the procedure is for returning your Lexmark printer to them, since they did not make you aware, when you purchased the printer, that you would be forbidden buy law to use 3rd party replacement ink!
W32.Yaha.K@mm
e nc /data/w32.yaha.k@mm.html
Discovered on: December 24, 2002
Last Updated on: December 30, 2002 04:09:45 PM
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/v
This is pretty good list
http://www.linux-on-laptops.com/
another good method to determine Linux compatibility is to search for "Linux and the model number of a laptop" that you are interested in, using Goggle
I agree 100%, I was only using the vehicle to show that even a statistically small amount of defects can have major consequences. This was truly an amazing car, seeing as how it originally came off the assembly line with a Citation FWD drive train (used in the rear end) and a chevette front end. I am pretty sure back in those days each division had its own budget for vehicle development, This led to major fighting among the divisions, one of the best examples is the Pontiac Transport, Chevy refused to produce the vehicle and this was a major factor in its demise. GM eventually came to its senses and took control back from the individual divisions.
What if it was Pontiac Fiero. If I recall correctly, only 1 in a 1000 was catching fire. Hey, the total production of the Fiero was less that 350 thousand cars, so they only lost 350, no big deal right
The university that I attend supports zip 100's on every machine on campus. After spending years hating Iomega, the one product company, I am now completely dependent on them. I can store all the work for all of my classes on one disk and have, what is almost, the same access speed for my documents as a real hard drive.
An internal zip for the home machine is as cheap as 50 bucks at the local computer store and for the less technically savvy a usb zip 100 can be had for 85 bucks on sale.
Of course data loss is an even bigger issue with these things and I have found if you don't use the software eject feature there is a huge chance of corrupting data. Floppies do the same thing when you take the away from an application that is using them.
Clearly CDR-W's are the future but their time has not come yet masses and bandwidth costs for all those stolen mp3's and apps would be huge in a university setting.
As far as Network storage, how much are you going to give them? I have tried that method and 5megs is worthless. I would need at least 50 Megs to make it worthwhile to use, since I can carry 100 Megs on one disk right now.
Go for the one-product companies' solution, Its not going away and its not so bad being a Iomega Victim.
Here's good old James Rosini's page on the Kenyon & Kenyon. .
In case the name does not ring a bell, This is the guy who signed the legal
paperwork that was sent to the Online Barcode Database
http://www.kenyonlaw.com/faboutus.htm James Rosini
Well actually you will search for his page due to the way the
web site is set-up. lets send him a message,
I did.
This is my third attempt to get a response concerning your so call IP rights to a piece of hardware that you freely and without restriction gave away. Now it seems that your company is attempting try to claim some sort of contract or ownership of this device and its output. Additionally you claim that use of this device if governed by a document you call a EULA. 1. What does this document have to do with this piece of hardware and why was I not informed about this so called EULA when if received my cue cat from radio shack? 2. Using US law as an example, explain to me how I can be held to an agreement, when the existence of this agreement was never disclosed to me? I would like an answer to the new and original questions, a lack of response to this second attempt to contact your company will be taken as clear evidence that you do not possess any documental IP rights to this device and are only engaged in a campaign to harass legitimate users of these devices. Begin original message. As I would like to release my own version of cue cat decoding software. 1. Please explain to me exactly what is your IP interest in the cue cat and how does it apply to US law? This so called IP interest is not mentioned at all on the web site and was not explained in your recent letter to slashdot.org. 2. Additionally are you saying that decoding or converting the output of a device that was sold to me for 00.00 dollars and is now owned by me, illegal? thank you Jason W
Here's good old James Rosini's page on the Kenyon & Kenyon. In case the name does not ring a bell, This is the guy who signed the legal paperwork that was sent to the Online Barcode Database.http://www.kenyonlaw.com/faboutus.htm Well actually you will search for his page due to the way the web site is set-up. lets send him a message, I did This is my third attempt to get a response concerning your so call IP rights to a piece of hardware that you freely and without restriction gave away. Now it seems that your company is attempting try to claim some sort of contract or ownership of this device and its output. Additionally you claim that use of this device if governed by a document you call a EULA. 1. What does this document have to do with this piece of hardware and why was I not informed about this so called EULA when if received my cue cat from radio shack? 2. Using US law as an example, explain to me how I can be held to an agreement, when the existence of this agreement was never disclosed to me? I would like an answer to the new and original questions, a lack of response to this second attempt to contact your company will be taken as clear evidence that you do not possess any documental IP rights to this device and are only engaged in a campaign to harass legitimate users of these devices. Begin original message. As I would like to release my own version of cue cat decoding software. 1. Please explain to me exactly what is your IP interest in the cue cat and how does it apply to US law? This so called IP interest is not mentioned at all on the web site and was not explained in your recent letter to slashdot.org. 2. Additionally are you saying that decoding or converting the output of a device that was sold to me for 00.00 dollars and is now owned by me, illegal? thank you