MTV could promote, but it couldn't distribute. iTMS can do both, and can make purchasing music a true impulse buy. Not only that, but theoretically Apple could do the same sort of thing with music that Amazon has done with books and other stuff making it easy to find new artists that you are likely to enjoy.
The Apple record problem is nothing. Apple would probably even using other companies as record labels, and it could certainly have a subsidiary with a different name that was the record label. Apple probably doesn't want to deal directly with the artists. The difference would be that these new labels would have a whole lot less leverage because Apple would be the promoter and the distributor and record labels would be demoted to dealing only with band management and touring.
Any way you slice it the days where the radio is the only way to reach large audiences are coming to an end. Likewise the days where you purchase your music in a record store are coming to an end. Right now the record labels' power is based on their ability to control promotion and distribution.
Apparently his blog described several bouts of what could be considered "binge drinking." That's also something that the school can't simply overlook. What would happen if the kid died binge drinking and the parents sued. If it could be proved that the administration knew about the student's behavior and didn't do anything about it then they could be held liable (potentially).
IMHO you shouldn't disparage someone in a public forum unless you are willing to either A) prove it or B) deal with the consequences. Just because you have a right to free speech does not mean that you should be able to abuse people with impunity. Mr. Blogger said some things that were uncalled for. When asked to apologize Mr. Blogger refused. A group composed of faculty and students then decided that Mr. Blogger didn't really belong at Marquette. Apparently Mr. Blogger wasn't a very good fit for their community.
My own personal experience is that people that get called before the Dean of students probably deserve to get kicked out. I mean, seriously, how mad do you have to be at someone before you go to the Dean and point out crap they say in their blog? Throw in the fact that instead of apologizing, accepting probation, and keeping his nose clean this kid *demands* a conduct hearing. Then this kid gets his conduct hearing and a group of students and faculty chooses what is essentially the harshest punishment. This kid sounds like a Grade A jerk to me. Heck, the kid could have gotten away with a slap on the wrist at almost any time simply by saying, "what I said was uncalled for. I am very sorry." Now Mr. Blogger probably doesn't get to become a dentist. Is saying "sorry" really too much to ask.
I bet the application he sent in to get his scholarship painted him as being respectful and disciplined. What a load of hooey that turned out to be.
The reason that the Music Industry is so excited about screwing up iTMs that it *does* promote music better than FM radio. Under the current regime the only way to get your music heard by millions of potential fans is to sign up with one of the record labels. This isn't because making an album is hard (it isn't), but rather because the promotion and distribution of music on a grand scale used to require the sorts of contacts that only the record labels had access to.
Apple's iTMS turns that idea on its head. All of a sudden it is possible to promote and distribute an album simply by strategic placement on iTMS. Right now Apple sells primarily music that they get from the record labels, but if iTMS becomes the primary way that people pay for music then the terms will almost certainly change. Apple will simply cut out the middlemen and start signing up recording artists itself. Right now Apple is willing to accept pennies on the dollar not because it is making money selling iPods, but rather because Apple knows that if it waits long enough it can cut itself a huge slice of the entire music business while making the traditional record labels with their quaint methods of distribution and promotion obsolete.
Before you get all tied in knots. Here's the sequence of events.
A student complained about Scott Taylor's blog.
The Dean read the blog, realized that it was inappropriate, and suggested a punishment. The punishment consisted of probation, a public apology, and possibly some alcohol abuse classes.
Mr. Blogger refused this punishment and forced the issue before a conduct committee comprised of students and faculty.
The conduct committee sold Mr. Blogger down the river. Apparently Mr. Blogger didn't make much of an impression.
You can't really blame this debacle on the administration at Marquette. The Dean tried to sort this out without suspending the student. Mr. Blogger chose instead to try behind door number three and found out that his own peers didn't appreciate his behavior. Seriously, as someone that went to Marquette can you imagine posting disparaging remarks about your professors and fellow classmates in a public blog and then, when confronted with your behavior, defying the Dean and demanding a conduct committee meeting? This kid was at Marquette on scholarship. I think that it's not unreasonable for Marquette administrators to count on their scholarship students to be good examples, not bad ones.
Actually, I did read the article, and I read the blog that broke the original story. That's where I learned that the suspension was not the first punishment that was offered, nor was the punishment handed down by Marquette's administration. The original punishment was as follows:
He [the Dean] offered the student the option of signing "an admission of guilt" and accepting a punishment that included probation for the rest of the student's Marquette career, making a public apology to his dental school class, and making an appointment with the Director of the Marquette University Counseling Center "to assess both your alcohol abuse and the underlying basis of your remarks posted on your blog site."
Personally, I think that's a little steep, but certainly not outside the bounds of reason. Mr. Blogger decided to fight this instead and so he took his case both to the blogosphere and before the committee that suspended him. According to the JS Online article that committee was composed of, "professors, administrators and students." Mr. Blogger can't hardly blame Marquette's administration. Another student brought the blog to their attention. The school can't simply do nothing about complaints like that. The Dean tried to give the kid a "reasonable" punishment and he refused. Then a committee comprised of faculty and students found him guilty and sent him down the river. Apparently the students and faculty don't think much of this kid's behavior. You can't blame the administration for that.
As a private institution Marquette *should* be able to do whatever it wants. That's the advantage that you get when you are a private institution. The wording is vague because Marquette's board undoubtedly wanted to leave a great deal of discretion with the dean. In fact, were this not the case then the kid wouldn't have had a prayer. The committee of students and faculty didn't show this kid an ounce of mercy. The Dean tried to handle the problem more humanely (using his broad powers), and the kid refused. Frankly, I am surprised that Marquette went through the trouble. It's not unreasonable for a university to expect higher standards of scholarship students.
What is exactly is *private* about a blog that can be accessed by millions of people? I would be very surprised if you won a wrongful termination lawsuit if it could be proved that you abused your coworkers in public forum. Most people understand that this sort of behavior certainly does effect work behavior. Besides, I would bet that you aren't nearly as good a worker at work as you suppose you are. As someone that worked in a large IT department in a former life it generally wasn't that hard to find plenty of evidence that disaffected workers were slacking off. Usually its as simple as going over the proxy server logs.
Mr. Blogger's original punishment was to have been probation, a public apology, and some alcohol abuse classes. I personally think that is perhaps a little steep, but not unreasonably so considering that Mr. Blogger was a scholarship student. Marquette should expect more of students when they are picking up the bill for their education. Mr. Blogger refused the original punishment and turned to the blogosphere for "protection." It turns out that Marquette's administration doesn't give a crap about the blogosphere--there are plenty of students who would be more than happy to study at Marquette--and they also don't take kindly to scholarship students that are ungrateful, unapologetic, and unruly.
The University originally asked that Mr. Blogger be put on probation, that he make a public apology, and that he take some alcohol abuse classes. Mr. Blogger *refused* and instead took his case to the blogosphere. Basically Mr. Blogger wants the privilege of attending Marquette, but he doesn't want to be subject to the rules of that institution. Unlike your contrived example of being sold into slavery for some random infraction this isn't a case of a contract that is unreasonable. Marquette clearly outlined what the student needed to do to stay at Marquette, and the student *chose* not to comply. The blog entries might have been minor. However, blatantly disregarding the administration at Marquette can hardly be considered *minor*.
The University played fair, and "playing fair" doesn't mean that the administration and owners of the University don't have their rights too. If Mr. Blogger doesn't want to live by the rules, then he can find himself somewhere else to study.
Heck, Mr. Blogger was on a scholarship to Marquette. I think that it goes without saying that Marquette should expect the best out of its scholarship students, not the worst. Marquette certainly shouldn't have to put up with scholarship students that, when asked to apologize for saying things that are clearly outside the pale, instead try and justify their behavior and turn their poor behavior into a free speach issue.
Now Mr. Blogger is unlikely to ever become a Dentist. Boo Freaking Hoo.
Then Mr. Blogger should have taken Marquette up on their first offer of probation, a public apology, and some alcohol abuse classes. Mr. Blogger can't hardly blame Marquette administrators if they now feel that someone else is more deserving of their "encouragement." Perhaps you have heard of the old adage, "don't bite the hand that feeds you." The school administration should expect its scholarship students to be the "best" examples of Marquette students, not the worst examples. The folks at Marquette are free to run their school how they see fit. It would appear that Mr. Blogger needs Marquette a whole lot more than Marquette needs Mr. Blogger.
You might feel that the punishment is a bit harsh, but it's hardly your call, is it now? Personally, I think the kid got what was coming to him. Mr. Blogger wrote things about the professors and students at Marquette that were out of line. In itself, that's not necessarily such a bad thing. This is undoubtedly why Marquette's administration originally asked for probation and a public apology. The real mistake was turning to the blogosphere for "protection" from this punishment. Mr. Blogger didn't want to apologize, and he didn't want to be on probation and he figured that if he turned the heat up enough on Marquette that he would get off scott free.
He was wrong. Now he gets to be something else for a living, and if he goes to school somewhere else he'll get to pay for the privilege himself. Perhaps next time he'll be more civil about what he says in public, and more grateful to those that are paying his way, and more apologetic when he hurts someone else's feelings.
Yes, and that's because Mr. Blogger chose to see what was behind door #3 instead of choosing the initial punishment which was a public apology, probation for the rest of his time at Marquette, and some alcohol abuse classes. This just goes to show that only a fool messes with the administration at a private university. They don't have to worry about political correctness. Heck, a school like Marquette doesn't even give a crap about the possibilities of negative publicity. Lots of students would be more than happy to take Mr. Blogger's place. That leaves the Marquette administrators the freedom to settle the problem in a deliciously "old school" fashion. They gave Mr. Blogger a chance to apologize and clean up his act, and now Mr. Blogger gets to do something else for a living.
Perhaps next time Mr. Blogger will show a little respect. We are all free to say what we want, but only an idiot overlooks the possible repercussions of speaking their mind in public.
The IBM exec was just making a very important political point. While Microsoft is a big company with a lot of political influence, IBM is also a big company with lots of political influence (and a lot more experience wielding that influence). IBM also has something that Microsoft does not have, and that is a significant investment in the state of Massachusetts.
This is an excellent point. Office 12 has a completely redesigned UI with a whole new "ribbon" concept. OpenOffice.org probably requires *less* retraining than Microsoft office. It is deliberately similar to the latest versions of MS Office. Throw in the fact that most of the new functionality of MS Office is tied to Microsoft's new server software and now is basically the perfect time to look at an alternative office suite and IBM's alternative office software.
Thanks for the info. That explains why they keep talking about "culture," instead of media. It also explains why politicians in France would be interested in passing such a law.
Yes, but while it is one thing to pass laws here in the U.S. that try to protect the American commercial software industry (and Hollywood), it makes little sense to do so outside of the U.S. Can you imagine the uproar in the United States if Congress started passing laws that upheld foreign companies at the expense of U.S. citizens? U.S. politics are convoluted and often corrupt, but at least when you pinpoint the special interest group that is being favored by the law it isn't a *foreign* special interest group.
If French politicians can be bought to the extent that they will push the agenda of foreign corporations then the French really don't have anyone to blame but themselves. I mean, seriously, that's just crazy.
Linux hardware compatability only affects the barrier to entry and trying it out, and has nothing to do with actual adoption.
Yes, and most people test drive Free Software before they put it into production. That's precisely my point. The BSDs, despite their huge early lead over Linux, and their extremely corp-friendly licensing, lost out to Linux because Linus was far more practical about supporting crappy hardware. People could "try out" Linux on ridiculous hardware, while the BSDs only ran on serious hardware.
Almost nobody would throw out a Linux deployment and swap it with a Solaris deployment. There's basically no reason to do that.
Precisely. This is why Sun should be trying to get early adopters and folks that are "testing driving" Free Software. Unfortunately, unless you are purchasing hardware specifically for OpenSolaris you probably won't get it to run. Linux will probably run on the same hardware, however. Now, once you get everything up and running on Linux and you've played around with it and are starting to feel comfortable are you going to give Solaris a whack. Probably not.
However, it's easy to envision rolling out new servers on Solaris, even in an established Linux shop.
Why? So you can support two different operating systems? Why not just roll out more Linux servers? OpenSolaris has very little to offer someone that has already made the leap to Linux. OpenSolaris is definitely useful for keeping existing Sun customers from jumping to Linux, but that probably doesn't help Sun's bottom line much. With Sun's current overhead it can't afford to become just another Red Hat.
Suns HCL for servers is quite good, it lacks more on the client side than the server side. You can easily buy hardware from any of the top tier providers (notably Dell, HP, and IBM) and Solaris will run peachy on that hardware.
Unfortunately for Sun it's Red Hat Linux and not OpenSolaris that's in the drop down on these companies website.
If you're building a server from Newegg, you may run into more issues. But if you're building a server to run Solaris, then you'll be looking at their HCL anyway and buying those bits that work. And most companies don't build their own servers, it's simply rarely worth the dollars saved to not buy one with a click of the mouse from Dell.
Once again. This allows folks that are already Solaris fans to purchase an inexpensive Solaris machine. It doesn't help Sun attract new customers though.
Sun is not Yet Another BSD, simply because BSD doesn't have a company with the organization, infrastructure, expertise and marketing budget of company like Sun behind it. BSD is a fine generic Unix services platform, Sun is a fine generic Unix services platform with huge company behind it and a robust application and higher level (identity, provisioning, communications, integration) services stack.
The BSDs had a lot more organization than Linux did when Linux was first created, but Linux was far more likely to at least try and support the wacky hardware that people actually had. Besides, while Sun may be trying to sell OpenSolaris, if you talk to IBM, HP, or Dell, or Novell about a UNIX-like OS, then Linux is going to come up, not OpenSolaris. At this point Sun has to do better than have a bigger marketing engine than the BSDs. Sun has to have a bigger and better marketing engine than all of the folks promoting Linux. Heck, more than half of Sun's own x86-64 servers get shipped with Red Hat Linux. That should tell you something about the efficacy of Sun's OpenSolaris marketing machine.
Sun's new hardware is making news because it's newsworthy hardware. Dell doesn't have anything comparable yet. And all of those people that are buying Sun hardware with Linux on it are doing something that they
It's true that Solaris x86 supports less hardware than
Linux but Solaris x86 stills supports a lot of different
boards and cards. Way more than enough to satisfy most
organizations.
Yes, and the BSDs support less hardware too, and for whatever reason that leads lots and lots of people to choose Linux, despite the advantages of the BSDs. The piece that the Solaris advocates miss is that Free Software (which now includes OpenSolaris) projects often sneak in through the back door on sub-par hardware. It's often not a question of purchasing new hardware (at first), but rather a question of repurposing old hardware. OpenSolaris simply can't compete at that.
OpenSolaris definitely can't compete when it comes to development laptops, and that's probably even more important. Most devs have a laptop these days, and if they are running an UNIX-alike on that laptop chances are good that it is Linux and not Solaris.
Sun *will* talk about "support" and "reliability" all day
because the are *important*. And the Linux community, and
not even RH, come even close to the type of support that
Sun offers. If you don't understand the importance and
type of support that Sun can offer to organizations, then,
well, you just don't understand what real support is and
how important a role it plays in many organizations and
companies.
Bottom line... You can beat your drum all day long about
the greatness of Linux but you're only preaching to the
choir. Those whose job it is to be in the know understand
that Solaris is better than Linux.
If what Sun is offering with OpenSolaris is so great then why do Sun's own hardware customers prefer to purchase their software support from Red Hat? That's the real question. Sure, Sun is selling a lot of x86-64 boxes, but over half of them choose to load Red Hat Linux. If Sun can't get the OpenSolaris message out to its own hardware customers, what makes you think that it is going to be successful with the masses of customers that don't choose Sun hardware? Clearly either customers don't believe that Sun's software is really all that great, or Sun has the worst marketing division the world has ever known.
I am as far from an MS employee as you can possibly get. I just wish that it was feasible to write desktop software in Java. Quite frankly, it's not. The situation improves a bit thanks to IBM and SWT, but that's not really Java, is it? I want Java to win, but, from where I stand Sun is in the way.
The fact of the matter is that I hack in Java for a living, but when I have to write the GUI stuff I either have to use HTML or use something like.NET. Java really isn't much of an alternative on the desktop. It says something about Java's prowess on the desktop that in the Free Software world Java is losing out to Mono.
Microsoft has already screwed Sun. Or, more accurately, Microsoft got Sun to screw themselves. Java had a chance to become the de-facto way to create GUI software. Sun had even tricked Microsoft into doing much of the hard work for Sun. Microsoft had a JVM that made creating performant Java software for Windows a reality. Sun had tricked Microsoft into building on their software. Yes Microsoft extended it so that it only worked on Windows, but Sun *owned* Java, and that could have easily been fixed, and Java would have reigned supreme on the desktop and on the server.
Flash forward a few years and Microsoft now has a completely different technology that replaces Java. It's slick, works well, and it is useful for creating both desktop and server software. Meanwhile, IBM, Sun's biggest Java ally is doing the same thing that Microsoft did earlier. Instead of pushing the pure Java Swing toolkit IBM is pushing machine-dependant SWT. In fact, this tactic has been so successful that the most popular Java desktop application around (Eclipse) is not pure Java. Now pure Java faces not one but two competitors for desktop applications, and Red Hat and the gcj crew are hard at work on a Java-alike system that compiles to machine code, and the Free Software community is hard at work creating a Java-alike system that's not likely to be terribly compatible with Sun's Java (but that will run all of the nifty Free Software written in Java). Heck, with Mono gaining popularity it's possible that Sun's own desktop (which is based on Gnome) will soon be heavily dependant on.NET instead of Java.
The folks at Microsoft are laughing their asses off at Sun. If Sun wouldn't have gone to court then piles of Windows software would have been written in Java, and Microsoft would have to care about what Sun did with Java. What's more, Microsoft would have to worry about ISVs porting their Windows-specific Java code to pure Java and offering it for OS X or Linux. Of course, in a cruel twist of fate Microsoft is soon going to have to worry about folks porting C# code to Mono, but things would be far worse if Java had gained supremacy on the desktop. Microsoft can always scare potential defectors with the "Intellectual Property" demon with Mono, but there's no question who owns Java. If Sun hadn't flushed their cards down the toilet they'd be in the driver's seat right now.
I am not arguing that Microsoft often subverts standards through embracing, extending, and extinguishing them. However, in this case if Sun would have allowed Microsoft to persist then the fight would be on Sun's turf (it owned Java). If Sun would have allowed Java to become the de-facto way to develop for Windows before looking to litigate things would be very different now. Heck, Sun could have probably even been able to force Microsoft to pony up more cash.
There's a huge problem with your assessment, and its the same demon (ha ha) that has been haunting the BSD folks forever. Solaris simply doesn't have the hardware support to replace Linux. In 1995 when I first started using Linux I originally was going to use FreeBSD, but my CD-Rom drive wasn't supported by FreeBSD. It was supported by Linux, and that was all she wrote. Since that time I have set up and administered hundreds of Linux servers and desktops, and have only been peripherally involved with any BSD boxes. In fact, on several occasions I have replaced BSD boxes with Linux because I was more familiar with Linux.
Solaris might have a portal software, a J2EE server, an instant messaging server, and a directory server, but Free Software already has all of those things, and they can all be installed rather easily on any Linux box. Heck, pretty soon we'll probably be able to install Sun's newly released software on Linux (assuming the software license allows it). Part of the reason that Sun is giving this software away is that there are already Free Software equivalents of Sun's enterprise software that are gaining acceptance rapidly in the marketplace. Sun can't sell its software, and so it is giving it away in an effort to make itself relevant.
However, when Sun tries to get you to install Solaris instead of Linux you'll quickly find out a very important fact. The supported hardware list for Solaris is *much* smaller than the supported hardware list for Linux. You can throw Linux on just about any machine and it will run just fine. Want to develop on a Linux laptop? Setting up the beast might be a little tricky, but chances are good that it will run fine. Heck, you can even purchase laptops with Linux pre-installed. Want to develop on a Solaris laptop? Good luck mate.
Now Sun can talk about "support" and "reliability" all day. Or like the BSDs Sun can go on about its UNIX heritage and whatnot. The reality is that random Linux installs, even on crappy hardware, are generally pretty solid, and very performant. What's more, by opting for Linux you get more than just a kernel, you get a whole range of software that can be easily installed (apt-get install foo) and maintained. GNU/Linux gives you all of the tools that you need, in a pretty convenient package. Solaris can't really compete with that.
Sure, there are some IT types that currently don't have a clue about Linux, but you can pretty much guarantee that if they don't have a clue about Linux they don't have a clue about Solaris either. The folks that are clueless about Linux are Windows folks that are looking over the UNIX fence to see if Linux might offer them something. Many have preconceived notions that basically guarantee that they come away with a bad impression. Folks in the UNIX world, on the other hand, are probably already familiar with Linux. Part of Sun's problem is that Solaris admins, faced with the prospects of being forced towards Windows by the cost of Sun hardware, have been jumping ship to Linux for years. If you are a Solaris user you almost certainly already have some Linux in your shop, and chances are good that you *like* Linux. If you still do UNIX development then chances are even better that your developers switched to Linux desktops 5 years ago. You want to know a dirty little secret. The majority of Sun's AMD servers aren't leaving Sun's warehouses with Solaris installed. The majority of them are preinstalled with copies of Red Hat Linux. If Sun can't get its own hardware customers to use Solaris what are the chances of folks throwing Solaris on random non-Sun hardware?
Sun knows that it can't compete with Dell when it comes to commodity hardware, and so it is desperate to become more service oriented. Unfortunately Sun's own customers don't want Sun's service, just Sun's hardware. Sun is giving away more software because Red Hat already gives away a software stack that is very competitive with Sun's software stack. Sun hopes that this move will mean more of its own hardware ships with Solaris. I don't think that even the wildest dreamers at Sun expect Solaris to take off on other people's hardware.
I am not saying that these guys are Boy Scouts, or anything of the sort. I am just pointing out that there is a large portion of the population that is *HAPPY* to pay these ridiculous rates. The reason that they are happy is that paying these ridiculous rates is the only way that they can get the car that they want RIGHT NOW. To me the reckless desire to sell your future out from under you simply so you can have something shiny today seems insane, but then again I understand the math.
Remember when your math teacher in Junior High said, "you will use this stuff everyday?" Well, for you and I he was right. We use those lessons every day of the year to decide whether or not we can afford a certain purchase, or whether or not the terms on a certain line of credit are worth accepting. The average person that goes into a "Buy Here Pay Here" car lot failed to comprehend the importance of basic algrebra, and they will pay for the lack all of their lives.
If these people had a lick of sense instead of agreeing to these terms they would go out and buy a much less expensive clunker automobile (my first car cost less than $200) and save their money until they could afford to put down enough money to get accepted on a traditional auto loan (or better yet simply buy a newer vehicle outright when they saved enough money).
Re:There are several competing systems like this
on
High-Tech RepoMan
·
· Score: 1
If it makes you feel better a lot of the rich frat boys go on to screw up their lives fairly royally. Eventually you either learn some discipline or society teaches you the hard way.
My first car cost me the princely sum of $150 in 1992. I am pretty sure that I could pick up a similar vehicle today for approximately the same price. The vehicle was a 79 Toyota Corolla and I drove it for four years (very carefully). As an alternative form of transportation I also had a mountain bike that had an extra set of studded snow tires. The mountain bike cost several times more than the car. The advantages of the mountain bike was that A) I could repair it myself, B) it didn't require insurance, C) riding a bike made my legs look really good in shorts.
The bottom line is that if you are so marginally employed that you can't afford transportation to work then you really need to find a better job.
I would gladly have tax money used to subsidise gym membership, nutrition education at school, and widespread bans on marketing of junk food.
Fah, there's no need to get the government involved. Losing weight doesn't cost money. Even the most moronic overweight person knows that their diet isn't good for them. If they don't know that their diet is killing them, they don't need a government program to educate them on the evils of Twinkies and Cherry Cola, they need a new physician.
If you want to lose weight the secret is quite simple. Write down everything you eat (measure it, don't guess), and feed it into fitday.com. Next, borrow a wheelbarrow, fill it full of heavy stuff (bags of sand are good because they make it easy to judge your progress), and push it around the neighborhood. When you can't push it any farther, write down how far you pushed it and how much stuff you had in the wheelbarrow. Rest a day, and then try it again. Next time either try to push the wheelbarrow a little farther, or add more weight. Weigh yourself regularly (either every day or every week) and keep track of how much you weigh. If you aren't losing weight after two weeks of pushing around the wheelbarrow three times a week lower your caloric intake by 500 calories (or add another day per week of pushing around the wheelbarrow).
Now do this for the rest of your life. Eventually you will probably get strong enough that you don't need the wheelbarrow. Purchase one of those heavy canvas army duffel bags and fill that full of sandbags. Alternatively, push your car around a parking lot. Better yet, push your car around a parking lot with the duffel bag thrown over your shoulder.
Do this sort of thing for a few months and everyone you know will be asking you for your dieting secrets. They'll assume that your physique changed due to some mythical all-grapefruit diet, or a pill that "melts the fat away." When you tell them that your new muscles and the fat loss are due to pushing a wheelbarrow full of sand bags around the neighborhood they'll go back to their infomercials and their quest for an "easy" weight loss route. There's no trick to weight loss.
The grossly overweight already have a disproportionate amount of my tax money. You'd be surprised how many folks with "disabilities" are just plain too fat to work. I don't mind that these people want to live that way, but I am not keen on throwing good money after bad.
Slashdot Mirror
MTV could promote, but it couldn't distribute. iTMS can do both, and can make purchasing music a true impulse buy. Not only that, but theoretically Apple could do the same sort of thing with music that Amazon has done with books and other stuff making it easy to find new artists that you are likely to enjoy.
The Apple record problem is nothing. Apple would probably even using other companies as record labels, and it could certainly have a subsidiary with a different name that was the record label. Apple probably doesn't want to deal directly with the artists. The difference would be that these new labels would have a whole lot less leverage because Apple would be the promoter and the distributor and record labels would be demoted to dealing only with band management and touring.
Any way you slice it the days where the radio is the only way to reach large audiences are coming to an end. Likewise the days where you purchase your music in a record store are coming to an end. Right now the record labels' power is based on their ability to control promotion and distribution.
Apparently his blog described several bouts of what could be considered "binge drinking." That's also something that the school can't simply overlook. What would happen if the kid died binge drinking and the parents sued. If it could be proved that the administration knew about the student's behavior and didn't do anything about it then they could be held liable (potentially).
IMHO you shouldn't disparage someone in a public forum unless you are willing to either A) prove it or B) deal with the consequences. Just because you have a right to free speech does not mean that you should be able to abuse people with impunity. Mr. Blogger said some things that were uncalled for. When asked to apologize Mr. Blogger refused. A group composed of faculty and students then decided that Mr. Blogger didn't really belong at Marquette. Apparently Mr. Blogger wasn't a very good fit for their community.
My own personal experience is that people that get called before the Dean of students probably deserve to get kicked out. I mean, seriously, how mad do you have to be at someone before you go to the Dean and point out crap they say in their blog? Throw in the fact that instead of apologizing, accepting probation, and keeping his nose clean this kid *demands* a conduct hearing. Then this kid gets his conduct hearing and a group of students and faculty chooses what is essentially the harshest punishment. This kid sounds like a Grade A jerk to me. Heck, the kid could have gotten away with a slap on the wrist at almost any time simply by saying, "what I said was uncalled for. I am very sorry." Now Mr. Blogger probably doesn't get to become a dentist. Is saying "sorry" really too much to ask.
I bet the application he sent in to get his scholarship painted him as being respectful and disciplined. What a load of hooey that turned out to be.
The reason that the Music Industry is so excited about screwing up iTMs that it *does* promote music better than FM radio. Under the current regime the only way to get your music heard by millions of potential fans is to sign up with one of the record labels. This isn't because making an album is hard (it isn't), but rather because the promotion and distribution of music on a grand scale used to require the sorts of contacts that only the record labels had access to.
Apple's iTMS turns that idea on its head. All of a sudden it is possible to promote and distribute an album simply by strategic placement on iTMS. Right now Apple sells primarily music that they get from the record labels, but if iTMS becomes the primary way that people pay for music then the terms will almost certainly change. Apple will simply cut out the middlemen and start signing up recording artists itself. Right now Apple is willing to accept pennies on the dollar not because it is making money selling iPods, but rather because Apple knows that if it waits long enough it can cut itself a huge slice of the entire music business while making the traditional record labels with their quaint methods of distribution and promotion obsolete.
Before you get all tied in knots. Here's the sequence of events.
You can't really blame this debacle on the administration at Marquette. The Dean tried to sort this out without suspending the student. Mr. Blogger chose instead to try behind door number three and found out that his own peers didn't appreciate his behavior. Seriously, as someone that went to Marquette can you imagine posting disparaging remarks about your professors and fellow classmates in a public blog and then, when confronted with your behavior, defying the Dean and demanding a conduct committee meeting? This kid was at Marquette on scholarship. I think that it's not unreasonable for Marquette administrators to count on their scholarship students to be good examples, not bad ones.
Actually, I did read the article, and I read the blog that broke the original story. That's where I learned that the suspension was not the first punishment that was offered, nor was the punishment handed down by Marquette's administration. The original punishment was as follows:
Personally, I think that's a little steep, but certainly not outside the bounds of reason. Mr. Blogger decided to fight this instead and so he took his case both to the blogosphere and before the committee that suspended him. According to the JS Online article that committee was composed of, "professors, administrators and students." Mr. Blogger can't hardly blame Marquette's administration. Another student brought the blog to their attention. The school can't simply do nothing about complaints like that. The Dean tried to give the kid a "reasonable" punishment and he refused. Then a committee comprised of faculty and students found him guilty and sent him down the river. Apparently the students and faculty don't think much of this kid's behavior. You can't blame the administration for that.
As a private institution Marquette *should* be able to do whatever it wants. That's the advantage that you get when you are a private institution. The wording is vague because Marquette's board undoubtedly wanted to leave a great deal of discretion with the dean. In fact, were this not the case then the kid wouldn't have had a prayer. The committee of students and faculty didn't show this kid an ounce of mercy. The Dean tried to handle the problem more humanely (using his broad powers), and the kid refused. Frankly, I am surprised that Marquette went through the trouble. It's not unreasonable for a university to expect higher standards of scholarship students.
What is exactly is *private* about a blog that can be accessed by millions of people? I would be very surprised if you won a wrongful termination lawsuit if it could be proved that you abused your coworkers in public forum. Most people understand that this sort of behavior certainly does effect work behavior. Besides, I would bet that you aren't nearly as good a worker at work as you suppose you are. As someone that worked in a large IT department in a former life it generally wasn't that hard to find plenty of evidence that disaffected workers were slacking off. Usually its as simple as going over the proxy server logs.
Mr. Blogger's original punishment was to have been probation, a public apology, and some alcohol abuse classes. I personally think that is perhaps a little steep, but not unreasonably so considering that Mr. Blogger was a scholarship student. Marquette should expect more of students when they are picking up the bill for their education. Mr. Blogger refused the original punishment and turned to the blogosphere for "protection." It turns out that Marquette's administration doesn't give a crap about the blogosphere--there are plenty of students who would be more than happy to study at Marquette--and they also don't take kindly to scholarship students that are ungrateful, unapologetic, and unruly.
The University originally asked that Mr. Blogger be put on probation, that he make a public apology, and that he take some alcohol abuse classes. Mr. Blogger *refused* and instead took his case to the blogosphere. Basically Mr. Blogger wants the privilege of attending Marquette, but he doesn't want to be subject to the rules of that institution. Unlike your contrived example of being sold into slavery for some random infraction this isn't a case of a contract that is unreasonable. Marquette clearly outlined what the student needed to do to stay at Marquette, and the student *chose* not to comply. The blog entries might have been minor. However, blatantly disregarding the administration at Marquette can hardly be considered *minor*.
The University played fair, and "playing fair" doesn't mean that the administration and owners of the University don't have their rights too. If Mr. Blogger doesn't want to live by the rules, then he can find himself somewhere else to study.
Heck, Mr. Blogger was on a scholarship to Marquette. I think that it goes without saying that Marquette should expect the best out of its scholarship students, not the worst. Marquette certainly shouldn't have to put up with scholarship students that, when asked to apologize for saying things that are clearly outside the pale, instead try and justify their behavior and turn their poor behavior into a free speach issue.
Now Mr. Blogger is unlikely to ever become a Dentist. Boo Freaking Hoo.
Then Mr. Blogger should have taken Marquette up on their first offer of probation, a public apology, and some alcohol abuse classes. Mr. Blogger can't hardly blame Marquette administrators if they now feel that someone else is more deserving of their "encouragement." Perhaps you have heard of the old adage, "don't bite the hand that feeds you." The school administration should expect its scholarship students to be the "best" examples of Marquette students, not the worst examples. The folks at Marquette are free to run their school how they see fit. It would appear that Mr. Blogger needs Marquette a whole lot more than Marquette needs Mr. Blogger.
You might feel that the punishment is a bit harsh, but it's hardly your call, is it now? Personally, I think the kid got what was coming to him. Mr. Blogger wrote things about the professors and students at Marquette that were out of line. In itself, that's not necessarily such a bad thing. This is undoubtedly why Marquette's administration originally asked for probation and a public apology. The real mistake was turning to the blogosphere for "protection" from this punishment. Mr. Blogger didn't want to apologize, and he didn't want to be on probation and he figured that if he turned the heat up enough on Marquette that he would get off scott free.
He was wrong. Now he gets to be something else for a living, and if he goes to school somewhere else he'll get to pay for the privilege himself. Perhaps next time he'll be more civil about what he says in public, and more grateful to those that are paying his way, and more apologetic when he hurts someone else's feelings.
Yes, and that's because Mr. Blogger chose to see what was behind door #3 instead of choosing the initial punishment which was a public apology, probation for the rest of his time at Marquette, and some alcohol abuse classes. This just goes to show that only a fool messes with the administration at a private university. They don't have to worry about political correctness. Heck, a school like Marquette doesn't even give a crap about the possibilities of negative publicity. Lots of students would be more than happy to take Mr. Blogger's place. That leaves the Marquette administrators the freedom to settle the problem in a deliciously "old school" fashion. They gave Mr. Blogger a chance to apologize and clean up his act, and now Mr. Blogger gets to do something else for a living.
Perhaps next time Mr. Blogger will show a little respect. We are all free to say what we want, but only an idiot overlooks the possible repercussions of speaking their mind in public.
The IBM exec was just making a very important political point. While Microsoft is a big company with a lot of political influence, IBM is also a big company with lots of political influence (and a lot more experience wielding that influence). IBM also has something that Microsoft does not have, and that is a significant investment in the state of Massachusetts.
This is an excellent point. Office 12 has a completely redesigned UI with a whole new "ribbon" concept. OpenOffice.org probably requires *less* retraining than Microsoft office. It is deliberately similar to the latest versions of MS Office. Throw in the fact that most of the new functionality of MS Office is tied to Microsoft's new server software and now is basically the perfect time to look at an alternative office suite and IBM's alternative office software.
Thanks for the info. That explains why they keep talking about "culture," instead of media. It also explains why politicians in France would be interested in passing such a law.
Hey now, 300 kinds of cheese is one of the things that France gets *right*.
Mmmm... Cheese.
Yes, but while it is one thing to pass laws here in the U.S. that try to protect the American commercial software industry (and Hollywood), it makes little sense to do so outside of the U.S. Can you imagine the uproar in the United States if Congress started passing laws that upheld foreign companies at the expense of U.S. citizens? U.S. politics are convoluted and often corrupt, but at least when you pinpoint the special interest group that is being favored by the law it isn't a *foreign* special interest group.
If French politicians can be bought to the extent that they will push the agenda of foreign corporations then the French really don't have anyone to blame but themselves. I mean, seriously, that's just crazy.
Yes, and most people test drive Free Software before they put it into production. That's precisely my point. The BSDs, despite their huge early lead over Linux, and their extremely corp-friendly licensing, lost out to Linux because Linus was far more practical about supporting crappy hardware. People could "try out" Linux on ridiculous hardware, while the BSDs only ran on serious hardware.
Precisely. This is why Sun should be trying to get early adopters and folks that are "testing driving" Free Software. Unfortunately, unless you are purchasing hardware specifically for OpenSolaris you probably won't get it to run. Linux will probably run on the same hardware, however. Now, once you get everything up and running on Linux and you've played around with it and are starting to feel comfortable are you going to give Solaris a whack. Probably not.
Why? So you can support two different operating systems? Why not just roll out more Linux servers? OpenSolaris has very little to offer someone that has already made the leap to Linux. OpenSolaris is definitely useful for keeping existing Sun customers from jumping to Linux, but that probably doesn't help Sun's bottom line much. With Sun's current overhead it can't afford to become just another Red Hat.
Unfortunately for Sun it's Red Hat Linux and not OpenSolaris that's in the drop down on these companies website.
Once again. This allows folks that are already Solaris fans to purchase an inexpensive Solaris machine. It doesn't help Sun attract new customers though.
The BSDs had a lot more organization than Linux did when Linux was first created, but Linux was far more likely to at least try and support the wacky hardware that people actually had. Besides, while Sun may be trying to sell OpenSolaris, if you talk to IBM, HP, or Dell, or Novell about a UNIX-like OS, then Linux is going to come up, not OpenSolaris. At this point Sun has to do better than have a bigger marketing engine than the BSDs. Sun has to have a bigger and better marketing engine than all of the folks promoting Linux. Heck, more than half of Sun's own x86-64 servers get shipped with Red Hat Linux. That should tell you something about the efficacy of Sun's OpenSolaris marketing machine.
Yes, and the BSDs support less hardware too, and for whatever reason that leads lots and lots of people to choose Linux, despite the advantages of the BSDs. The piece that the Solaris advocates miss is that Free Software (which now includes OpenSolaris) projects often sneak in through the back door on sub-par hardware. It's often not a question of purchasing new hardware (at first), but rather a question of repurposing old hardware. OpenSolaris simply can't compete at that.
OpenSolaris definitely can't compete when it comes to development laptops, and that's probably even more important. Most devs have a laptop these days, and if they are running an UNIX-alike on that laptop chances are good that it is Linux and not Solaris.
If what Sun is offering with OpenSolaris is so great then why do Sun's own hardware customers prefer to purchase their software support from Red Hat? That's the real question. Sure, Sun is selling a lot of x86-64 boxes, but over half of them choose to load Red Hat Linux. If Sun can't get the OpenSolaris message out to its own hardware customers, what makes you think that it is going to be successful with the masses of customers that don't choose Sun hardware? Clearly either customers don't believe that Sun's software is really all that great, or Sun has the worst marketing division the world has ever known.
I am as far from an MS employee as you can possibly get. I just wish that it was feasible to write desktop software in Java. Quite frankly, it's not. The situation improves a bit thanks to IBM and SWT, but that's not really Java, is it? I want Java to win, but, from where I stand Sun is in the way.
The fact of the matter is that I hack in Java for a living, but when I have to write the GUI stuff I either have to use HTML or use something like .NET. Java really isn't much of an alternative on the desktop. It says something about Java's prowess on the desktop that in the Free Software world Java is losing out to Mono.
Microsoft has already screwed Sun. Or, more accurately, Microsoft got Sun to screw themselves. Java had a chance to become the de-facto way to create GUI software. Sun had even tricked Microsoft into doing much of the hard work for Sun. Microsoft had a JVM that made creating performant Java software for Windows a reality. Sun had tricked Microsoft into building on their software. Yes Microsoft extended it so that it only worked on Windows, but Sun *owned* Java, and that could have easily been fixed, and Java would have reigned supreme on the desktop and on the server.
Flash forward a few years and Microsoft now has a completely different technology that replaces Java. It's slick, works well, and it is useful for creating both desktop and server software. Meanwhile, IBM, Sun's biggest Java ally is doing the same thing that Microsoft did earlier. Instead of pushing the pure Java Swing toolkit IBM is pushing machine-dependant SWT. In fact, this tactic has been so successful that the most popular Java desktop application around (Eclipse) is not pure Java. Now pure Java faces not one but two competitors for desktop applications, and Red Hat and the gcj crew are hard at work on a Java-alike system that compiles to machine code, and the Free Software community is hard at work creating a Java-alike system that's not likely to be terribly compatible with Sun's Java (but that will run all of the nifty Free Software written in Java). Heck, with Mono gaining popularity it's possible that Sun's own desktop (which is based on Gnome) will soon be heavily dependant on .NET instead of Java.
The folks at Microsoft are laughing their asses off at Sun. If Sun wouldn't have gone to court then piles of Windows software would have been written in Java, and Microsoft would have to care about what Sun did with Java. What's more, Microsoft would have to worry about ISVs porting their Windows-specific Java code to pure Java and offering it for OS X or Linux. Of course, in a cruel twist of fate Microsoft is soon going to have to worry about folks porting C# code to Mono, but things would be far worse if Java had gained supremacy on the desktop. Microsoft can always scare potential defectors with the "Intellectual Property" demon with Mono, but there's no question who owns Java. If Sun hadn't flushed their cards down the toilet they'd be in the driver's seat right now.
I am not arguing that Microsoft often subverts standards through embracing, extending, and extinguishing them. However, in this case if Sun would have allowed Microsoft to persist then the fight would be on Sun's turf (it owned Java). If Sun would have allowed Java to become the de-facto way to develop for Windows before looking to litigate things would be very different now. Heck, Sun could have probably even been able to force Microsoft to pony up more cash.
There's a huge problem with your assessment, and its the same demon (ha ha) that has been haunting the BSD folks forever. Solaris simply doesn't have the hardware support to replace Linux. In 1995 when I first started using Linux I originally was going to use FreeBSD, but my CD-Rom drive wasn't supported by FreeBSD. It was supported by Linux, and that was all she wrote. Since that time I have set up and administered hundreds of Linux servers and desktops, and have only been peripherally involved with any BSD boxes. In fact, on several occasions I have replaced BSD boxes with Linux because I was more familiar with Linux.
Solaris might have a portal software, a J2EE server, an instant messaging server, and a directory server, but Free Software already has all of those things, and they can all be installed rather easily on any Linux box. Heck, pretty soon we'll probably be able to install Sun's newly released software on Linux (assuming the software license allows it). Part of the reason that Sun is giving this software away is that there are already Free Software equivalents of Sun's enterprise software that are gaining acceptance rapidly in the marketplace. Sun can't sell its software, and so it is giving it away in an effort to make itself relevant.
However, when Sun tries to get you to install Solaris instead of Linux you'll quickly find out a very important fact. The supported hardware list for Solaris is *much* smaller than the supported hardware list for Linux. You can throw Linux on just about any machine and it will run just fine. Want to develop on a Linux laptop? Setting up the beast might be a little tricky, but chances are good that it will run fine. Heck, you can even purchase laptops with Linux pre-installed. Want to develop on a Solaris laptop? Good luck mate.
Now Sun can talk about "support" and "reliability" all day. Or like the BSDs Sun can go on about its UNIX heritage and whatnot. The reality is that random Linux installs, even on crappy hardware, are generally pretty solid, and very performant. What's more, by opting for Linux you get more than just a kernel, you get a whole range of software that can be easily installed (apt-get install foo) and maintained. GNU/Linux gives you all of the tools that you need, in a pretty convenient package. Solaris can't really compete with that.
Sure, there are some IT types that currently don't have a clue about Linux, but you can pretty much guarantee that if they don't have a clue about Linux they don't have a clue about Solaris either. The folks that are clueless about Linux are Windows folks that are looking over the UNIX fence to see if Linux might offer them something. Many have preconceived notions that basically guarantee that they come away with a bad impression. Folks in the UNIX world, on the other hand, are probably already familiar with Linux. Part of Sun's problem is that Solaris admins, faced with the prospects of being forced towards Windows by the cost of Sun hardware, have been jumping ship to Linux for years. If you are a Solaris user you almost certainly already have some Linux in your shop, and chances are good that you *like* Linux. If you still do UNIX development then chances are even better that your developers switched to Linux desktops 5 years ago. You want to know a dirty little secret. The majority of Sun's AMD servers aren't leaving Sun's warehouses with Solaris installed. The majority of them are preinstalled with copies of Red Hat Linux. If Sun can't get its own hardware customers to use Solaris what are the chances of folks throwing Solaris on random non-Sun hardware?
Sun knows that it can't compete with Dell when it comes to commodity hardware, and so it is desperate to become more service oriented. Unfortunately Sun's own customers don't want Sun's service, just Sun's hardware. Sun is giving away more software because Red Hat already gives away a software stack that is very competitive with Sun's software stack. Sun hopes that this move will mean more of its own hardware ships with Solaris. I don't think that even the wildest dreamers at Sun expect Solaris to take off on other people's hardware.
I am not saying that these guys are Boy Scouts, or anything of the sort. I am just pointing out that there is a large portion of the population that is *HAPPY* to pay these ridiculous rates. The reason that they are happy is that paying these ridiculous rates is the only way that they can get the car that they want RIGHT NOW. To me the reckless desire to sell your future out from under you simply so you can have something shiny today seems insane, but then again I understand the math.
Remember when your math teacher in Junior High said, "you will use this stuff everyday?" Well, for you and I he was right. We use those lessons every day of the year to decide whether or not we can afford a certain purchase, or whether or not the terms on a certain line of credit are worth accepting. The average person that goes into a "Buy Here Pay Here" car lot failed to comprehend the importance of basic algrebra, and they will pay for the lack all of their lives.
If these people had a lick of sense instead of agreeing to these terms they would go out and buy a much less expensive clunker automobile (my first car cost less than $200) and save their money until they could afford to put down enough money to get accepted on a traditional auto loan (or better yet simply buy a newer vehicle outright when they saved enough money).
If it makes you feel better a lot of the rich frat boys go on to screw up their lives fairly royally. Eventually you either learn some discipline or society teaches you the hard way.
My first car cost me the princely sum of $150 in 1992. I am pretty sure that I could pick up a similar vehicle today for approximately the same price. The vehicle was a 79 Toyota Corolla and I drove it for four years (very carefully). As an alternative form of transportation I also had a mountain bike that had an extra set of studded snow tires. The mountain bike cost several times more than the car. The advantages of the mountain bike was that A) I could repair it myself, B) it didn't require insurance, C) riding a bike made my legs look really good in shorts.
The bottom line is that if you are so marginally employed that you can't afford transportation to work then you really need to find a better job.
Fah, there's no need to get the government involved. Losing weight doesn't cost money. Even the most moronic overweight person knows that their diet isn't good for them. If they don't know that their diet is killing them, they don't need a government program to educate them on the evils of Twinkies and Cherry Cola, they need a new physician.
If you want to lose weight the secret is quite simple. Write down everything you eat (measure it, don't guess), and feed it into fitday.com. Next, borrow a wheelbarrow, fill it full of heavy stuff (bags of sand are good because they make it easy to judge your progress), and push it around the neighborhood. When you can't push it any farther, write down how far you pushed it and how much stuff you had in the wheelbarrow. Rest a day, and then try it again. Next time either try to push the wheelbarrow a little farther, or add more weight. Weigh yourself regularly (either every day or every week) and keep track of how much you weigh. If you aren't losing weight after two weeks of pushing around the wheelbarrow three times a week lower your caloric intake by 500 calories (or add another day per week of pushing around the wheelbarrow).
Now do this for the rest of your life. Eventually you will probably get strong enough that you don't need the wheelbarrow. Purchase one of those heavy canvas army duffel bags and fill that full of sandbags. Alternatively, push your car around a parking lot. Better yet, push your car around a parking lot with the duffel bag thrown over your shoulder.
Do this sort of thing for a few months and everyone you know will be asking you for your dieting secrets. They'll assume that your physique changed due to some mythical all-grapefruit diet, or a pill that "melts the fat away." When you tell them that your new muscles and the fat loss are due to pushing a wheelbarrow full of sand bags around the neighborhood they'll go back to their infomercials and their quest for an "easy" weight loss route. There's no trick to weight loss.
The grossly overweight already have a disproportionate amount of my tax money. You'd be surprised how many folks with "disabilities" are just plain too fat to work. I don't mind that these people want to live that way, but I am not keen on throwing good money after bad.