Netscape's "failure" (not sure how they failed, I'm using NS6 right now-- if Netscape also owned an OS, they could bundle to prevent consumers from ever caring enough to switch, too) is more likely a result of their boneheaded decision to refactor the entire browser from the ground up. And it's *still* a mess if the source to Mozilla is any indication of how the project might look internally to Netscape. Plus, IE has the added advantage of not being distracted by stupid requirements like being able to do mail and read newsgroups or theming the toolbar with yet another set of widgets/icons that are almost the same as before.
I think the key problem GNOME has is that there is no native web browser that isn't a complete monster. In my brief usability tests comparing Mozilla with Konqueror I concluded that Konq is lightyears ahead of Mozilla in terms of usability, customization, ease to compile, and integration with a desktop environment (note that this last is also a potential drawback since it depends on certain KDE i/o slaves to do its work-- and yes, it can run under any wm or destkop, but will be most efficient inside KDE).
I see the following two main advantages to gtk over Qt (and this is why I will not use Qt except as a user): gtk is written for C development. C is much more standard on Unix/GNU/Linux than C++. Perl is written in C, which means that adding wrappers for the gtk library is likely to be less problematic than for some other toolkits (although Perl has it's own excellent version of tk... this advantage is likely to extend to other languages written in C, Ruby being foremost in my mind).
gtk has the same LPGL terms for every instance of the toolkit. This means that no matter what type of development you are doing that you never have to worry about licensing, at least not the way you might with Qt.
It is too bad, however, that on top of these two fairly decent widget toolkits the desktop environments are vastly different. GNOME just ain't as easy to get up and running with as KDE-- and I mean in the "compile from source and install" sense. I've also noticed distinct efficiency differences between the two on low-end hardware (KDE coming out ahead).
What we're left with is a mess, but it's a good mess. We have real powers like IBM supporting gtk/GNOME, and we have other serious groups like the German government supporting Qt/KDE (witness the Aegypten project for secure communications). We get the best of both worlds, and fortunately we can do some mixing and matching as needed. So either way users win and developers seem to have two decent high-quality choices to choose from (forgetting about the ubiquitous Tk for a moment).
Why do you people insist on posting the Salon link to Courtney's ripoff version of Steve Albini's article, which can be found (along with a lot of other great articles on the music industry and copyright at this page?
Well, you can research the protocol all you want, but it is the client application that is the problem here. Now maybe the protocol makes security an issue when used correctly, but still it is up to the client developer to introduce the feature in a non-safe way.
A recent thread on the debian-legal list indicates to me that Bram doesn't quite get the whole idea behind free software. A number of Debian users are questioning whether the VIM license is in fact free-- it has a fairly noxious clause about making changes available to the original author. This sort of thing just may not be appropriate in some circumstances. I also think that Bram is a generous, giving, intelligent person who wouldn't go apeshit over infractions that had good reason or were not of true import.
But, imho, he completely misunderstands the GPL, which applies *only* to distribution to external entities and requires *only* that you distribute source code with executables when you do that. His license is intended to give the original author (and only the original author) some few extra rights-- mostly the ability to harvest changes from forks out in the world. But I think his changes are unnecessary, vague, and the world doesn't need another open-source-ish license-- no matter how well intended.
The file format is not frozen enough to prevent older players from having trouble in some cases with files ripped from newer versions. I had this happen on my home "jukebox" which was running a beta when I tried to play files encoded with the rc2 version encoder. The point is well-taken from the repliant who points out hardware development times as an issue about why nothing is on shelves now, but hopefully there will be something available soon after the 1.0 version is released.
Hmmm. Maybe some Slashdotters? I don't know... I've been listening to BBC Radio 1 via Ogg Vorbis stream for several days-- in fact caught their New Year's festivities live from Donegall Square in Belfast over it last night. I'd say they are exactly a group who wouldn't switch just for the hell of it, and they're exploring Ogg Vorbis.
What Ogg Vorbis really needs is some hardware supported devices. Soon. If I can buy a CD player that also plays mp3s, that is a clear win for the mp3 format-- those players are quite a bit cheaper than the no-disc players, and offer me some versatility. And as far as I know, there isn't any device (CD-based or Flash based) that runs even a beta Ogg Vorbis codec.
Okay. So they got that part (and I've bothered to read the article now *grin*). And I'm impressed by their purported 90% success (to compare to 70% for alphanumeric passcodes).
However, I would have to see their test methodology to not instintively want to criticize this. I have to wonder if they tested peeople's ability to remember multiple passwords (especially mixing a frequent use one with a not-so-frequent one). I have to wonder how they plan to enable this system so that visually-impaired people, from the color-blind to people without eyeballs, can use the system. And I have to wonder how well they can test people's ability to remember *changed* passwords-- if the images from my last password show up on the selection grid, will this interfere with my visual memory?
Sadly, no. I got into Linux because I was tired of Mac OS 8.x (crashed more than a drunk driver on an icy road-- and don't tell me about "user error" crap, I pay that much money I shouldn't have to be so clever to keep it from crashing, Linux was free and I have to *work hard* to crash that) and OS X was way off in the future. I suppose you might say I used a Mac in order to avoid Microsoft, but I've been using Apples and Macs since way before MS had any serious GUI offered. And a big part of my interest in Linux resulted from wanting a Unix environment... before that I was dependent on ISPs with shell access so I could use Pine, ircii, and develop web pages in Perl.
And I've recently tried BSD. But my installs have been less than spectacular. One machine wouldn't even reboot (although with Linux and LILO or GRUB it hums right back to life). My PPC I'm afraid to even mess with given that YDL2.1 is so dang nice (and after trying Debian-PPC and failing, I'm just not interested in wasting time to fix something that ain't broke). And the x86 laptop I tried BSD on at least installed, but lots of little things like key bindings were so different from what I was used to in Linux that I figured I was wasting my time relearning all the basics and/or spending time changing from stuff like csh to bash, etc.
Your BSD was nice, but with Linux already cruising along nicely on several machines, why bother switching? Especially when my trials run were massive failures? The *only* compelling difference is the ports systems, and even those aren't much of an improvement over simply fetching and compiling tarballs by hand. So sorry, but I don't buy your assertion at all.
Except that it doesn't. Users looking for the easiest way out of an inconvenience will tend to choose the same or similar patterns with all too much regularity.
You have to scramble the images each time they are presented, or you have to *assign* the password, rather than allowing it to be chosen, otherwise on their second time through (maybe first) they'll simply choose the first icon, or the last icon, or each icon from left to right or each icon from right to left, or each icon in a certain position. Or some other variation on the Spaceballs "1.2.3.4.5" motif.
And if it's possible for the user to choose this way, it's possible for me to crack them a lot faster by starting with these obvious choices.
My main point was that three years isn't that far in the future. I'm aware of all the other invasions of privacy that are possible... which is why I said we've got bigger problems.:)
Besides, they say this tech won't be even close to available till 2005. So quit worrying.
That's three years from now. I expect to be alive in three years and expect to still value my privacy and personal freedom. And I *would* like to have at least one form of payment that is strictly anonymous-- i.e. cash. If this does away with that, even for mostly good intentions, I think we should all be afraid. Of course, I'm an American, so I've got bigger worries than this generally....
You are kidding right? When you say average geek, I think you should be emphasizing "geek" not "average". If you are so average that you wouldn't make use of a supercomputer, you are not a geek.
Ever wait all day to compile test versions of large software packages? No longer. Ever wish something would go just a little faster? No longer. Ever felt like encrypting all of Usenet history in order to do frequency analysis on the output? You might just finish your tests in this lifetime... the list goes on and on.
The main benefit that I see in looking at this sort of cheap components, high parallelism approach is that a failure in a unit is not fatal to the whole. But that's where I'm a little wary of the whole rigamarole of having to painstakingly compute the best way to connect all these redundant ethernet connections. That doesn't sound very fault tolerant to me. But then maybe it is, just that when a fault appears it slows down the system because it throws off the calculated topology.
Are you implying that 24% of all software is shoplifted in shrink-wrapped boxes from stores like Best Buy? No wonder they have those guys who get all touchy when you don't want them to look in your bag on the way out the door.
So are you saying that authors don't have some rights to control distribution at all? Two days after Windows XP is released it's a copying free-for-all (and maybe WXP is a bad example since MS is so obviously morally bankrupt)? I think there is a long ways to go from "moral" to "piracy". Of course, it is a thing we must each decide when we cross the line from ethical copying/re-use to "piracy".
Easy to avoid the whole issue and simply *not use* software which is not Free. This creates a de facto standard wherein "piracy" as a concept becomes meaningless. At this point in time, it is a choice one can make, so at least be making that choice first. Then we can discuss more rationally the problems with things like math patents without having to obscure our philosophy so that it also covers basically copying stuff without paying for it.
Never mind that the pagans stole it from the astronomers in the first place! Although admittedly back in them days one didn't know a priest from an astronomer nearly so well... kind of like that Asimov "Foundation" quote (misquote?) "Any advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
An interesting article on the solstice. And a happy longest/shortest day of the year to all! (Yes, I know I'm late by a few days, but so is this article... *grin*)
Of course people who do actually see the previews have very few places to brag about it where anyone will actually give a rat's ass... hence such a trend on imdb.
No. His job is creating more lawyers. Fabulous, just what we needed.
And I don't care to be called politically apathetic and proud of it. I maintain a healthy interest in and activity level in politics in spite of all his lawyerly offspring clogging the political arteries. I'm not going into detail, but I certainly fall into the "above average" politically active camp.
But the most important thing you can do to support freedom is to exercise it loudly and often-- historically *nothing* else has been as effective in making changes. And he says he advised Eric Eldred *not* to exercise his freedom by disobeying a flatly unjust law. Since 1998 they've been legislating on this matter-- that's great when it comes to law school graduates getting paid. But it's a terrible precedent to set in terms of appropriate response.
Is that what he'll advise all of us, if something like the SSSCA gets passed and we can no longer distribute Linux legally? Just wait until the lawyers settle it? And by the way keep donating, resources are sparse?
(And before you flame, I am a card carrying member of the ACLU, so I *do* donate to free speech causes)
Xerox shareholders maybe, but I think lawsuits like this, if Xerox ends up winning will do more to stifle invention and creativity than anything.
What I find most odd is that if you look at the filing date on the patent it's Oct 26, 1995. But according to http://www.palm.com/about/corporate/timeline.html the first Pilots were released in Mar 1996. They had five months to steal the technology wholesale... half of which is fairly obvious anyway.
Take your stereotypes about Gen-X slackers and shove them up your ass, okay? And frankly I don't care what project your grandfather was involved in. That, by chance, they chose that project is *immaterial* to your assertion that comparing the amount of time spent playing a game to the time spent on projects that promoted major social progress is somehow insulting to the people involved in the latter.
For all you know, John Glenn loves a good game of Windows Solitaire every damn night of the week. As to the people who died building the Empire State Building... if they were anything like the people who do construction now, I bet they spent a lot of their spare time playing card games, watching baseball, and playing whatever games were popular at the time (Monopoly maybe?). It's just an amusing comparison not meant to be taken as indicative of anything. Like when they tell you how many swimming pools full you sweat in a lifetime. So take a deep breath and get a life (cripes, I'm responding to your drivel, what does that say about me?)
Yeah, because comparing unrelated indicators like qualitative and quantitative is a Good Thing! I say we stick to quantitative, since that's what we have here... and in that respect all they were doing is saying, "Gee. Think what these people could have accomplished if they had done something else".
And frankly, I don't think your grandfather asking radio stations to turn down their broadcasts indicates much risk on his part, so I don't see why you're taking this so personally. *My* grandfather helped keep the Japanese from owning the whole Pacific Ocean-- but you don't see me ranting that the freedom to waste your life playing Solitaire is not what he had in mind when he served in the Army. *You* need to lighten up.
Not to mention that she basically lifted this whole rant from a real mover in the independent music scene-- Steve Albini (see http://www.negativland.com/intprop.html for more info-- Albini's article is the last item in that list of resources).
I think you missed the fact that I was attempting a spot of geek humor.:)
But I agree that it's important that MS has created hooks *into* Word and Excel from other applications. This means I could write a Perl or Ruby script (in addition to some scripting languages that MS would liek to sell me) which manipulates an Excel spreadsheet or a Word doc. Very handy, no? I think KDE is approaching some of this with their KParts scheme, and I think GNOME has a similar deal going (is it called Bonobo?), so it is spreading-- Microsoft just has a head start.
Slashdot Mirror
Netscape's "failure" (not sure how they failed, I'm using NS6 right now-- if Netscape also owned an OS, they could bundle to prevent consumers from ever caring enough to switch, too) is more likely a result of their boneheaded decision to refactor the entire browser from the ground up. And it's *still* a mess if the source to Mozilla is any indication of how the project might look internally to Netscape. Plus, IE has the added advantage of not being distracted by stupid requirements like being able to do mail and read newsgroups or theming the toolbar with yet another set of widgets/icons that are almost the same as before.
I think the key problem GNOME has is that there is no native web browser that isn't a complete monster. In my brief usability tests comparing Mozilla with Konqueror I concluded that Konq is lightyears ahead of Mozilla in terms of usability, customization, ease to compile, and integration with a desktop environment (note that this last is also a potential drawback since it depends on certain KDE i/o slaves to do its work-- and yes, it can run under any wm or destkop, but will be most efficient inside KDE).
I see the following two main advantages to gtk over Qt (and this is why I will not use Qt except as a user): gtk is written for C development. C is much more standard on Unix/GNU/Linux than C++. Perl is written in C, which means that adding wrappers for the gtk library is likely to be less problematic than for some other toolkits (although Perl has it's own excellent version of tk... this advantage is likely to extend to other languages written in C, Ruby being foremost in my mind).
gtk has the same LPGL terms for every instance of the toolkit. This means that no matter what type of development you are doing that you never have to worry about licensing, at least not the way you might with Qt.
It is too bad, however, that on top of these two fairly decent widget toolkits the desktop environments are vastly different. GNOME just ain't as easy to get up and running with as KDE-- and I mean in the "compile from source and install" sense. I've also noticed distinct efficiency differences between the two on low-end hardware (KDE coming out ahead).
What we're left with is a mess, but it's a good mess. We have real powers like IBM supporting gtk/GNOME, and we have other serious groups like the German government supporting Qt/KDE (witness the Aegypten project for secure communications). We get the best of both worlds, and fortunately we can do some mixing and matching as needed. So either way users win and developers seem to have two decent high-quality choices to choose from (forgetting about the ubiquitous Tk for a moment).
Why do you people insist on posting the Salon link to Courtney's ripoff version of Steve Albini's article, which can be found (along with a lot of other great articles on the music industry and copyright at this page?
Well, you can research the protocol all you want, but it is the client application that is the problem here. Now maybe the protocol makes security an issue when used correctly, but still it is up to the client developer to introduce the feature in a non-safe way.
A recent thread on the debian-legal list indicates to me that Bram doesn't quite get the whole idea behind free software. A number of Debian users are questioning whether the VIM license is in fact free-- it has a fairly noxious clause about making changes available to the original author. This sort of thing just may not be appropriate in some circumstances. I also think that Bram is a generous, giving, intelligent person who wouldn't go apeshit over infractions that had good reason or were not of true import.
But, imho, he completely misunderstands the GPL, which applies *only* to distribution to external entities and requires *only* that you distribute source code with executables when you do that. His license is intended to give the original author (and only the original author) some few extra rights-- mostly the ability to harvest changes from forks out in the world. But I think his changes are unnecessary, vague, and the world doesn't need another open-source-ish license-- no matter how well intended.
The file format is not frozen enough to prevent older players from having trouble in some cases with files ripped from newer versions. I had this happen on my home "jukebox" which was running a beta when I tried to play files encoded with the rc2 version encoder. The point is well-taken from the repliant who points out hardware development times as an issue about why nothing is on shelves now, but hopefully there will be something available soon after the 1.0 version is released.
Hmmm. Maybe some Slashdotters? I don't know... I've been listening to BBC Radio 1 via Ogg Vorbis stream for several days-- in fact caught their New Year's festivities live from Donegall Square in Belfast over it last night. I'd say they are exactly a group who wouldn't switch just for the hell of it, and they're exploring Ogg Vorbis.
What Ogg Vorbis really needs is some hardware supported devices. Soon. If I can buy a CD player that also plays mp3s, that is a clear win for the mp3 format-- those players are quite a bit cheaper than the no-disc players, and offer me some versatility. And as far as I know, there isn't any device (CD-based or Flash based) that runs even a beta Ogg Vorbis codec.
Okay. So they got that part (and I've bothered to read the article now *grin*). And I'm impressed by their purported 90% success (to compare to 70% for alphanumeric passcodes).
However, I would have to see their test methodology to not instintively want to criticize this. I have to wonder if they tested peeople's ability to remember multiple passwords (especially mixing a frequent use one with a not-so-frequent one). I have to wonder how they plan to enable this system so that visually-impaired people, from the color-blind to people without eyeballs, can use the system. And I have to wonder how well they can test people's ability to remember *changed* passwords-- if the images from my last password show up on the selection grid, will this interfere with my visual memory?
Sadly, no. I got into Linux because I was tired of Mac OS 8.x (crashed more than a drunk driver on an icy road-- and don't tell me about "user error" crap, I pay that much money I shouldn't have to be so clever to keep it from crashing, Linux was free and I have to *work hard* to crash that) and OS X was way off in the future. I suppose you might say I used a Mac in order to avoid Microsoft, but I've been using Apples and Macs since way before MS had any serious GUI offered. And a big part of my interest in Linux resulted from wanting a Unix environment... before that I was dependent on ISPs with shell access so I could use Pine, ircii, and develop web pages in Perl.
And I've recently tried BSD. But my installs have been less than spectacular. One machine wouldn't even reboot (although with Linux and LILO or GRUB it hums right back to life). My PPC I'm afraid to even mess with given that YDL2.1 is so dang nice (and after trying Debian-PPC and failing, I'm just not interested in wasting time to fix something that ain't broke). And the x86 laptop I tried BSD on at least installed, but lots of little things like key bindings were so different from what I was used to in Linux that I figured I was wasting my time relearning all the basics and/or spending time changing from stuff like csh to bash, etc.
Your BSD was nice, but with Linux already cruising along nicely on several machines, why bother switching? Especially when my trials run were massive failures? The *only* compelling difference is the ports systems, and even those aren't much of an improvement over simply fetching and compiling tarballs by hand. So sorry, but I don't buy your assertion at all.
Except that it doesn't. Users looking for the easiest way out of an inconvenience will tend to choose the same or similar patterns with all too much regularity.
You have to scramble the images each time they are presented, or you have to *assign* the password, rather than allowing it to be chosen, otherwise on their second time through (maybe first) they'll simply choose the first icon, or the last icon, or each icon from left to right or each icon from right to left, or each icon in a certain position. Or some other variation on the Spaceballs "1.2.3.4.5" motif.
And if it's possible for the user to choose this way, it's possible for me to crack them a lot faster by starting with these obvious choices.
My main point was that three years isn't that far in the future. I'm aware of all the other invasions of privacy that are possible... which is why I said we've got bigger problems. :)
Besides, they say this tech won't be even close to available till 2005. So quit worrying.
That's three years from now. I expect to be alive in three years and expect to still value my privacy and personal freedom. And I *would* like to have at least one form of payment that is strictly anonymous-- i.e. cash. If this does away with that, even for mostly good intentions, I think we should all be afraid. Of course, I'm an American, so I've got bigger worries than this generally....
You are kidding right? When you say average geek, I think you should be emphasizing "geek" not "average". If you are so average that you wouldn't make use of a supercomputer, you are not a geek.
Ever wait all day to compile test versions of large software packages? No longer. Ever wish something would go just a little faster? No longer. Ever felt like encrypting all of Usenet history in order to do frequency analysis on the output? You might just finish your tests in this lifetime... the list goes on and on.
The main benefit that I see in looking at this sort of cheap components, high parallelism approach is that a failure in a unit is not fatal to the whole. But that's where I'm a little wary of the whole rigamarole of having to painstakingly compute the best way to connect all these redundant ethernet connections. That doesn't sound very fault tolerant to me. But then maybe it is, just that when a fault appears it slows down the system because it throws off the calculated topology.
Are you implying that 24% of all software is shoplifted in shrink-wrapped boxes from stores like Best Buy? No wonder they have those guys who get all touchy when you don't want them to look in your bag on the way out the door.
So are you saying that authors don't have some rights to control distribution at all? Two days after Windows XP is released it's a copying free-for-all (and maybe WXP is a bad example since MS is so obviously morally bankrupt)? I think there is a long ways to go from "moral" to "piracy". Of course, it is a thing we must each decide when we cross the line from ethical copying/re-use to "piracy".
Easy to avoid the whole issue and simply *not use* software which is not Free. This creates a de facto standard wherein "piracy" as a concept becomes meaningless. At this point in time, it is a choice one can make, so at least be making that choice first. Then we can discuss more rationally the problems with things like math patents without having to obscure our philosophy so that it also covers basically copying stuff without paying for it.
Never mind that the pagans stole it from the astronomers in the first place! Although admittedly back in them days one didn't know a priest from an astronomer nearly so well... kind of like that Asimov "Foundation" quote (misquote?) "Any advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
An interesting article on the solstice. And a happy longest/shortest day of the year to all! (Yes, I know I'm late by a few days, but so is this article... *grin*)
Of course people who do actually see the previews have very few places to brag about it where anyone will actually give a rat's ass... hence such a trend on imdb.
No. His job is creating more lawyers. Fabulous, just what we needed.
And I don't care to be called politically apathetic and proud of it. I maintain a healthy interest in and activity level in politics in spite of all his lawyerly offspring clogging the political arteries. I'm not going into detail, but I certainly fall into the "above average" politically active camp.
But the most important thing you can do to support freedom is to exercise it loudly and often-- historically *nothing* else has been as effective in making changes. And he says he advised Eric Eldred *not* to exercise his freedom by disobeying a flatly unjust law. Since 1998 they've been legislating on this matter-- that's great when it comes to law school graduates getting paid. But it's a terrible precedent to set in terms of appropriate response.
Is that what he'll advise all of us, if something like the SSSCA gets passed and we can no longer distribute Linux legally? Just wait until the lawyers settle it? And by the way keep donating, resources are sparse?
(And before you flame, I am a card carrying member of the ACLU, so I *do* donate to free speech causes)
Record companies get sued all the time. Often by the very people they are ripping off.
As to "stealing" music... I don't condone shoplifting. Copying stuff without permission isn't "stealing" though. It's copying stuff.
What are you talking about? Metallica are just one of many bigtime bands that have sued their label at some point.
Xerox shareholders maybe, but I think lawsuits like this, if Xerox ends up winning will do more to stifle invention and creativity than anything.
What I find most odd is that if you look at the filing date on the patent it's Oct 26, 1995. But according to http://www.palm.com/about/corporate/timeline.html the first Pilots were released in Mar 1996. They had five months to steal the technology wholesale... half of which is fairly obvious anyway.
Take your stereotypes about Gen-X slackers and shove them up your ass, okay? And frankly I don't care what project your grandfather was involved in. That, by chance, they chose that project is *immaterial* to your assertion that comparing the amount of time spent playing a game to the time spent on projects that promoted major social progress is somehow insulting to the people involved in the latter.
For all you know, John Glenn loves a good game of Windows Solitaire every damn night of the week. As to the people who died building the Empire State Building... if they were anything like the people who do construction now, I bet they spent a lot of their spare time playing card games, watching baseball, and playing whatever games were popular at the time (Monopoly maybe?). It's just an amusing comparison not meant to be taken as indicative of anything. Like when they tell you how many swimming pools full you sweat in a lifetime. So take a deep breath and get a life (cripes, I'm responding to your drivel, what does that say about me?)
Yeah, because comparing unrelated indicators like qualitative and quantitative is a Good Thing! I say we stick to quantitative, since that's what we have here... and in that respect all they were doing is saying, "Gee. Think what these people could have accomplished if they had done something else".
And frankly, I don't think your grandfather asking radio stations to turn down their broadcasts indicates much risk on his part, so I don't see why you're taking this so personally. *My* grandfather helped keep the Japanese from owning the whole Pacific Ocean-- but you don't see me ranting that the freedom to waste your life playing Solitaire is not what he had in mind when he served in the Army. *You* need to lighten up.
Not to mention that she basically lifted this whole rant from a real mover in the independent music scene-- Steve Albini (see http://www.negativland.com/intprop.html for more info-- Albini's article is the last item in that list of resources).
I think you missed the fact that I was attempting a spot of geek humor. :)
But I agree that it's important that MS has created hooks *into* Word and Excel from other applications. This means I could write a Perl or Ruby script (in addition to some scripting languages that MS would liek to sell me) which manipulates an Excel spreadsheet or a Word doc. Very handy, no? I think KDE is approaching some of this with their KParts scheme, and I think GNOME has a similar deal going (is it called Bonobo?), so it is spreading-- Microsoft just has a head start.