This means that the directors have to walk the fine conflict of interest between enriching themselves, and acting in the best interests of the company.
s/acting in the best interests of the company/enriching the stockholders/
* We are going to give away this huge product and sell this tiny thing thats optional. If you do this you have just teached your customers that a huge product doesn't cost anything, and then it doesn't make any sense to pay for a tiny part. This is how peoples minds work. Any business-oriented person knows this but tech-people apperently does not.
Do business-oriented people also know about verb conjugation, and subject-verb agreement?
Fact is, technical people are not to blame for any of these. Bad business models are begotten by bad business people. Whether the businessperson's background is in technology or hog-farming is irrelevant.
As a side note whenever browsing with these "alternative" browsers make sure to set it to identify as what it really is. I am sure if web sites more visiters using other browsers, statements like "IE 5 required" will start to disappear.
Okay. How do I change IE so it stops reporting itself as "Netscape (compatible; MSIE)"?
If Infogrames's stockholders ever sue the management for not diligently protect the company's intellectual property in the form of 4KB of 20-year-old 6502 machine code, I will laugh for hours.
It would actually cost more for the company to go after copyright violators than they can ever hope to make in income by selling the game.
It comes down to this; you CANNOT overspend on education. That combination of words has no place in America; or shouldn't, at any rate.
The question is not on HOW MUCH is spent on education, it's HOW money is spent on education.
Would the money spent to get a computer for every student have been better spent on buying updated textbooks, ergonomic desks, art supplies, or on repairing instruments for the school band? Given the price tags on each of those items, my guess would be that the tools of traditional education would end up of more value to the students.
The GPL restricts you from taking away other people's freedoms.
Such as what?
"The freedom to ensure you get credited for any work that you have done"? That's not a freedom, it's an ethical standard.
"The freedom to exert control over the way work you have done may be used"? That's not a freedom either, that's an artificial right.
Not a GPL flame, but you're throwing around the word "freedom" in ways that don't make any sense. You're not doing the GPL community any favors by obscuring and sensationalizing the issues.
One small such point is when IBM gave out the specs to their hardware for PC allowing everyone to clone it, while Apple did not.
Bull. If Compaq hadn't reverse-engineered the IBM PC BIOS, there wouldn't have been any Gateways or Dells selling cheap PCs -- you'd be buying them from Big Blue, and paying twice as much.
The open standards allowed third parties to develop expansion cards and peripherals for the IBM PC, but the same is true in the realm of Macintosh.
There is absolutely no problem with companies using GPL'd code in their products if they freely disclose their modified source code.
Meaning, any company that sells closed-source software can't use GPL'ed code in their products.
Alternatively, they can keep the code extensions secret and use the modified code internally as much as they like.
See above.
Let's not forget, the GPL relies on copyright. That copyright is not granted to the public; it is granted to the author (or the FSF by proxy, in many cases).
Government projects which are funded for by us all, individuals and OSS corporations and closed-source corporations alike, should have their benefits reapable by all -- including those who for whatever reason have objections to the GPL.
A BSD-style libre/gratis license is much more appropriate.
So blind people can't sit in the back seat and have someone drive them through the ATM lane at their local branch bank?
So manufacuturers of Automatic Teller Machine hardware should stamp two different versions of the buttons -- one with braille for the walk-up ATMs, and one without for drive-ups?
It makes sense to have braille text on all ATM machines, financially if for no other reason.
If there's public outcry about CDs that don't work in normal CD players, there sure as hell will be public outcry against the RIAA's proposed solution of "buy your entire library of music again, on this new format that looks exactly the same as the existing format and won't work in normal CD players either" also...
...as if the music industry's actions has nothing whatsoever to do with frustrating music pirates.
The industry's intent is allegedly to frustrate 'pirates'. But since these measures have not been shown to prevent illegal copyright violations in any way, yet the industry continues to push these technologies, they must have elimination of 'fair use' rights as a secondary goal.
And what will an XML 1.0 parser ("millions served") do with an XML 1.1 document?
It should reject it as unsupported, and you should upgrade your parser to one that supports the 1.1 standard.
I think everyone agrees that the XML standards should be backwards-compatible, but you seem to be asserting the idea that it should be FORWARD-compatible and that a parser written today must correctly handle all future revisions that might ever be made, which is ludicrous.
The Microsoft Code of Behavior must be like the Pro Wrestling Rulebook... its contents automatically change themselves to whatever seems most appropriate for the current situation.
For those of you who care about interface, and every project should have at least one person working on it who does, the Isys Interface Hall of Shame is a great resource, and entertaining as well.
Or perhaps I should say "was", as it doesn't appear to have been updated in over 2 years.
Slashdot Mirror
If only a 30-foot Grace Hopper were roaming the streets of Midtown with a giant can of Flit...
Oh yeah, like any stock analyst has ever downgraded any stock...
This means that the directors have to walk the fine conflict of interest between enriching themselves, and acting in the best interests of the company.
s/acting in the best interests of the company/enriching the stockholders/
* We are going to give away this huge product and sell this tiny thing thats optional. If you do this you have just teached your customers that a huge product doesn't cost anything, and then it doesn't make any sense to pay for a tiny part. This is how peoples minds work. Any business-oriented person knows this but tech-people apperently does not.
Do business-oriented people also know about verb conjugation, and subject-verb agreement?
Fact is, technical people are not to blame for any of these. Bad business models are begotten by bad business people. Whether the businessperson's background is in technology or hog-farming is irrelevant.
[Bill Gates] almost single handedly set up a software empire and that too without an MBA from Harward.
And by 'Bill Gates', you mean 'Paul Allen'.
As a side note whenever browsing with these "alternative" browsers make sure to set it to identify as what it really is. I am sure if web sites more visiters using other browsers, statements like "IE 5 required" will start to disappear.
Okay. How do I change IE so it stops reporting itself as "Netscape (compatible; MSIE)"?
If Infogrames's stockholders ever sue the management for not diligently protect the company's intellectual property in the form of 4KB of 20-year-old 6502 machine code, I will laugh for hours.
It would actually cost more for the company to go after copyright violators than they can ever hope to make in income by selling the game.
It comes down to this; you CANNOT overspend on education. That combination of words has no place in America; or shouldn't, at any rate.
The question is not on HOW MUCH is spent on education, it's HOW money is spent on education.
Would the money spent to get a computer for every student have been better spent on buying updated textbooks, ergonomic desks, art supplies, or on repairing instruments for the school band? Given the price tags on each of those items, my guess would be that the tools of traditional education would end up of more value to the students.
The GPL restricts you from taking away other people's freedoms.
Such as what?
"The freedom to ensure you get credited for any work that you have done"? That's not a freedom, it's an ethical standard.
"The freedom to exert control over the way work you have done may be used"? That's not a freedom either, that's an artificial right.
Not a GPL flame, but you're throwing around the word "freedom" in ways that don't make any sense. You're not doing the GPL community any favors by obscuring and sensationalizing the issues.
You obviously haven't had to work with the kind of legacy code I have...
One small such point is when IBM gave out the specs to their hardware for PC allowing everyone to clone it, while Apple did not.
Bull. If Compaq hadn't reverse-engineered the IBM PC BIOS, there wouldn't have been any Gateways or Dells selling cheap PCs -- you'd be buying them from Big Blue, and paying twice as much.
The open standards allowed third parties to develop expansion cards and peripherals for the IBM PC, but the same is true in the realm of Macintosh.
There is absolutely no problem with companies using GPL'd code in their products if they freely
disclose their modified source code.
Meaning, any company that sells closed-source software can't use GPL'ed code in their products.
Alternatively, they can keep the code extensions secret and use the modified code internally as much as they like.
See above.
Let's not forget, the GPL relies on copyright. That copyright is not granted to the public; it is granted to the author (or the FSF by proxy, in many cases).
Government projects which are funded for by us all, individuals and OSS corporations and closed-source corporations alike, should have their benefits reapable by all -- including those who for whatever reason have objections to the GPL.
A BSD-style libre/gratis license is much more appropriate.
At least it's not a Philip Glass computer. Those things only execute endless loops!
So blind people can't sit in the back seat and have someone drive them through the ATM lane at their local branch bank?
So manufacuturers of Automatic Teller Machine hardware should stamp two different versions of the buttons -- one with braille for the walk-up ATMs, and one without for drive-ups?
It makes sense to have braille text on all ATM machines, financially if for no other reason.
...nor is it optional to install. "Install it
or find another server to play on".
Doesn't the presence of the word 'or' in that sentence PROVE that it's optional?
A while back I read an article about intel making p2 clockless chips, that performed rougly 3
times(in MHz terms not overall performance) faster.
ZUH?
How do you measure performance in MHz on a processor without a clock?
Having 79% of the market may legally make Google a monopoly (IANAL, so I dunno if it does), but it doesn't make them an ILLEGAL monopoly.
A comparison of any sort between the business practices of Google and those of, say Microsoft would be tenuous at best.
If there's public outcry about CDs that don't work in normal CD players, there sure as hell will be public outcry against the RIAA's proposed solution of "buy your entire library of music again, on this new format that looks exactly the same as the existing format and won't work in normal CD players either" also...
...as if the music industry's actions has nothing whatsoever to do with frustrating music pirates.
The industry's intent is allegedly to frustrate 'pirates'. But since these measures have not been shown to prevent illegal copyright violations in any way, yet the industry continues to push these technologies, they must have elimination of 'fair use' rights as a secondary goal.
Does it look like a chrome piggy bank with marital aids stuck all over it?
And what will an XML 1.0 parser ("millions served") do with an XML 1.1 document?
It should reject it as unsupported, and you should upgrade your parser to one that supports the 1.1 standard.
I think everyone agrees that the XML standards should be backwards-compatible, but you seem to be asserting the idea that it should be FORWARD-compatible and that a parser written today must correctly handle all future revisions that might ever be made, which is ludicrous.
The Microsoft Code of Behavior must be like the Pro Wrestling Rulebook... its contents automatically change themselves to whatever seems most appropriate for the current situation.
Steve's position is that of a fat guy on a treadmill, running to keep in place as it
steadily speeds up...
Well, that would explain the sweat stains on his shirt.
For those of you who care about interface, and every project should have at least one person working on it who does, the Isys Interface Hall of Shame is a great resource, and entertaining as well.
Or perhaps I should say "was", as it doesn't appear to have been updated in over 2 years.
That's Free GNU/Chinux, you goon!