When you get to the end of your road you have Facism. When companies reach the point that they effectively have total control over a market the rules change. From your remarks, I would assume that you would consider it a fair game of sport to pit a team of 6 year olds against an adult profesional sports team as long as they followed the same set of rules.
Yes - MS has the right to produce software
No - MS has the right to bundle software together
Not in an attempt to use their monopoly to leverage another market
Yes - MS has the right to build better software than other companies.
They have the right, they just don't exercise their right. They use their monopoly position to put out poor quality software. The US auto industry as a whole had a monopoly on car sales in the US until the 1970's. They kept putting out poor quality products and complained about loosing sales to foreign manufatures. MS can continue to put out poor quality software
Yes - MS has the right to market its software
As long as marketing is not another term for lying which has been a hallmark of MS. But then again, people who express the kind of ideas you do don't believe that fraud in business is an actionable offence.
Yes - MS has the right to not release its source code
Yes - MS has the right to make a profit
As long as it is made legally. Why did MS not have to pay hefty fines to the SEC last year while other companies did for the same offence?
Yes - MS has the right to not make public its internal protocols, file formats, internal api calls
It then should not market its products as general use.
Yes - MS has the right to change its software from version to version
That is fine. It will make people like it less
No - MS has the right to not make sure that each and every change to its software does not break some non-MS software
Not in an attempt to use their monopoly to leverage another market. When they market some of their software as a general purpose operating systems that other software companies can create applications on they don't have the right
This bicycle is the perfect metaphor for Microsoft. It has changed the wheels from round to square and requires a special suface to be ridden on. The wheels represent a standard that has been embraced and extended. The road represents a "proprietary" system.
If I wasn't at work I would be rolling on the floor laughing.
Another Libertarian or Anarchist comment! There are some venues in which Government is the appropirate vehicle for regulation. As a previous poster pointed out, automobile safety (at least to a point) is appropriate. Another transportation venue is aviation. If companies/corporations were allowed to do whatever they wanted, aircraft would be falling out of the sky at many times the rate they are today (I am an aviator and aircraft owner). Medical and food safety is yet another. I am sure that if given a little more time and a long sheet of paper, I could come up with quite a few and justification to support them.
Please don't say the Market Place will fix the problem. That is another of the Libertarian Myths. The real Market Place is filled with fraud and coercion (i.e Enron, Worldcom, Tyco, etc.)which would roadblock fixes.
The parent to the prior message is a troll! Sun has a lot of code in it because they released it from closed source to open source. They did this after stripping out proprietary code (read 3rd party) that could not be released as OSS from StarOffice. They may add code in the future under the OSS Licence that OO is under.
There is not the potential here of another TSG fiasco as Sun has aknowledge the OSS release.
Methinks they protest too loudly! The only reason Microsoft is complaining so loudly is to look as though they have been punished. Often, a person who has been punished will act as if they received a great deal more than they actually did when they know that they should have received harsher punishment. Microsoft would probably be glad to pay the current fine if it would end their anti-trust problems permanently. If MS keeps getting the governments to enfore their monopoly we are all in trouble.
Additionally from some other articles on the EU/MS debacle, MS seems to think that their "IP" rights trump all law. Their power has become such that they feel they are beyond the reach of law.
Just to let off steam. What will it be like in 10-20 years when heart pacemakers are based on an MS OS. Will their EULA exclued failure of the device? Will untimely deaths due to the BSOD status (though there is no screen)just be swept under the carpet? If Microsoft has their way, which in the end I think they will buy from our governments the world over, we will all be at their mercy. They are as insidious as the worst governments.
NUKE REDMOND!(I mean this figuratively. You can say things like that in business; MS does. You know -- "knife the baby","cut off their air supply","cut them off at the knees".)
The above editorializing and rant were brought to you by all of the letters in the English alphabet, some numbers, and a few punctuation marks.
So you feel that when one goes through the portal at work they should be cut off from the rest of the world. You stated your point of view; therefore you may take this as a personal attack when it is only my counter to your view. You seem to be converting employment to time limited slavery ( a harsh but just word in this instance). Your "many,many workers" example fails as many many of these workers now have cell-phones and/or pagers to be able to have some degree of communication. They temper when they communicate with respect to their work.
I have read of instances where there were similar no communication policies and individuals were not notified of family members being ill, injured or even killed. In the last case the police showed up at the employers to notify the person. I am sure it was a very "good" work environment!
I work in a situation where cell-phones are allowed in some areas but not in others as a matter of security. Abuse of cell-phones is not tolerated but the use of cell-phones is fine. This is reasonable. If the poster of this article is stating a policy driven by a few peoples abuse of cell-phones, it is a draconian remedy to the situation. A reasonable employer will punish the abusers and continue on.
A big "but" can be inserted. If the original case has to do with work other than the employer's, I will say shame on him for wasting his employer's time. Otherwise he or she should seek exemption from the rule, a company cell-phone, or a company pager.
The USA applies the golden rule: He who has the gold rules.,/p>
Did you think I was going to say something about do unto others as you would have them do unto you. This country is headed to the corporatist state (and the ruling party doesn't matter -- they both give in to BIG business). This is just another step down that path.
Some things still exist even if they are anachronistic. There are some powerful players in the amature radio arena who desire to keep the service. By your reasoning, we should have no public parks, public roads, or other public properties as monied intrest have long salivated to turn these over to themselves.
Pfizer is pursuing just that. They are sueing another company that produces a drug that has the same effect as Viagra(TM) but is a completely different chemical.
The SCO theroy
on
SCOoby Snacks
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
SCO to Judge:
The derivitive work, AIX or DYNIX (containing SysV and IBM code), is to be treated as the original work per 2.01(OK by US copyright).
AIX or DYNIX contain RCU, NUMA, JFS, etc. Linux also contains these.
Here is source code (in C) from AIX, DYNIX, and Linux. See how they are similar in implementing these functions.
Since AIX and DYNIX are to be treated as the original work (No. 1), see Judge, how they have stolen OUR code.
My butter anology:
SCO makes butter churning equipment (Patented).
IBM bought SCO butter churning equipment design as a basis to make their own.
IBM added their own improvements (Patented by IBM) to this design and sells that equipment.
IBM discovered a free design for butter making equipment and found they could add their improvements to that design. But to use the free design they had to make their improvements available in that design for others to build from.
SCO claims that since the improvements were originally used with their design even though they don't own the improvements they are theirs anyway.
SCO sues IBM for adding the improvements to the free design. They also say they will sue the people who use butter from the free design equipment.
Darling McGroom has declared Habitat for Humanity an evil, unconstitutional plot to destroy the United States homebuilding industry. S/He/It has said that building houses using unpaid labor and donated materials to give to someone will take the United States under and should be banned. S/He/It has proposed that the minimum standard for housing in the country should be 3500 square feet (325 square meters) with many other luxuries situated on 1 acre (.4 hectare) of land. Additionally those that cannot afford this will just have to rough it.
In further discussion, DM indicated that s/he/it would like to have all charity outlawed as a detriment to business. In closing s/he/it said "Let them eat cake!".
You must be a Libertarian or quasi-Libertarian who has the wrong definition of greed. Greed is associated with excessiveness. Capatalism is based on want or desire for something better (i.e car, lifestyle) but not to the degree of excessiveness. Some people do excell and gain a great deal. This is still not greed. Unfortunately greed is a term that is based in ethical and moral philosophy. Most Libertarians eschew ethics and morals in business believing essentially in economic anarchy.
I find it best to define greed as having to lie, cheat or steal in a small way or a big way to gain your ends.
BTW, *weasel is a good name for you. You would probably take the coins off of a dead man's eyes for own ends.
Wonder why there were so many black cars in the first part of the 20th century. Henry Ford said that you could get a Model T Ford in any color as long as it was black. There were people wanting to get them in other colors but couldn't. They could not afford the other automobiles of the day. Therefore they did not want a black car but to get a car they had to have black.
This is analogous to the way MS products end up in users hands. If you want a personal computer but don't have a great deal of money to spend on it you end up with Intel(or similar) hardware and MS Windows OS. Why? Because that is the way they come.
The power levels of current BPL demonstration projects are so high in the local area that they over ride all but the most powerful signals. This has been confirmed by actual reception tests. Often all that can be heard are the 10 KW (thousand watt) shortwave stations; and they are noisy even then. The companies that are wanting to deploy BPL want even higher power levels than are currently allowed by FCC Part 15 regulations.
Another problem is that high frequency radio transmission as low as 100 watts can wipe out the BPL signals.
These two cannot survive together. Wideband digital transmissions have other mediums that they can use: optical fiber, coaxial cable, shielded twisted pairs, twisted pairs, microwave frequecies. There is only ONE high frequency radio environment.
BPL is just a non-starter.
"Someone skilled in the art"!
This may be the delay in Longhorn
on
CNet on WinFS
·
· Score: 0
Seeing the preceeding article and this one gave rise to a thought. The reason for the delay in Longhorn where this file system will be introduced is that MS is trying to patent it so that no one else (read FOSS) can write drivers for it. Further lock-in to the MS world.
Microsoft can use this to completely monopolize the software market if in its broader scope it is enforceable. Hopefully it will be challenged in some manner and effectively anulled. However, if not, Microsoft will not allow any entity to do something that is encumbered by this patent unless they are using MS or MS approved software. This could mean the near death of all server OS's on the Net but MS's, and by consequence, all non MS OS's on the desktop. This is not just scary but outright, fundamentally disturbing.
'Cause, if you are an average Joe/Josephine using Linux on a Desktop/Laptop/Notebook Workstation which you shutdown after using it, you want faster boot times. I did a precursory read of the articles and this system (or similar) looks like a "good-thing" for Linux becoming more ubiquitous (everybody's OS) in the general Personal Computer market.
When I read a story like this I always think of Gomer Pyle's oft quoted statement:
"SUPRISE, SUPRISE, SUPRISE"
All OS's cost something to sustain. It is the cost of sustainment that is the important number. Licenses, support personnel, downtime, and other such things do add up. I've been involved with MS Window's based networks. The number of persons needed to provide support seems to be more. The difficulty in adding/updating software seems to cost more time (with MS OS's it must be done at a very off-schedule time since the system MUST be rebooted). Downtime from virii, worms, and program bugs/features due to the design of MS OS's seems to be more. I lost one days work due to the recent worms on MS even though I wasn't infected by them.
In general, after initial roll-out, Unix and like systems seem to require so much less support. And they are so much more remotely manageable.
If I had numbers I would use them. As an engineer subjective is not as good as objective in making a argument. But likewise butchered objective is worse than subjective.
"There are three kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, and statistics" - Benjamin Disraeli, Lord Courtney, Samuel Clemens
Corbis sues Amazon. Corbis is owned by Bill Gates who is also founder and a major stake/share holder in Microsoft. Amazon uses Linux to power its web site (I think this is a fact). Now if Amazon will just switch to Win2000, MS IIS, MS SQL Server, and other MS products the lawsuit will be quietly dropped. Could this be the real reason that the lawsuit was filed without first notifying Amazon to remove these items from sale.
IANAL and other disclaimers apply. I am just a thinking human being.
Bill G is equating Linux to OS/2 to get the suits making the acquisition/purchasing decisions to avoid it since Linux will obviously (according to Gates) go away in 10 years and not be a player. Nothing more than marketing FUD which he expects the above mentioned to belive and therefore bodyblock the use of Linux to make the FUD come true.
The answer to the question posed is NO! Microsoft is out to demolish/destroy/strangle/kill (their words at one point or another) any and all competition. Their goal is to have an unchecked stanglehold on all computational machines from embedded computers to the functions now handled by mainframes. They have said that their only fair share is 100%. That might have sounded more like boast and bravado than their real goal when said but they have proven through further statments that truly is their goal. With the results of the anti-trust suit Microsoft has now been unleashed to do whatever they want.
Slashdot Mirror
When you get to the end of your road you have Facism. When companies reach the point that they effectively have total control over a market the rules change. From your remarks, I would assume that you would consider it a fair game of sport to pit a team of 6 year olds against an adult profesional sports team as long as they followed the same set of rules.
Yes - MS has the right to produce software
No - MS has the right to bundle software together
- Not in an attempt to use their monopoly to leverage another market
Yes - MS has the right to build better software than other companies.- They have the right, they just don't exercise their right. They use their monopoly position to put out poor quality software. The US auto industry as a whole had a monopoly on car sales in the US until the 1970's. They kept putting out poor quality products and complained about loosing sales to foreign manufatures. MS can continue to put out poor quality software
Yes - MS has the right to market its software- As long as marketing is not another term for lying which has been a hallmark of MS. But then again, people who express the kind of ideas you do don't believe that fraud in business is an actionable offence.
Yes - MS has the right to not release its source codeYes - MS has the right to make a profit
- As long as it is made legally. Why did MS not have to pay hefty fines to the SEC last year while other companies did for the same offence?
Yes - MS has the right to not make public its internal protocols, file formats, internal api calls- It then should not market its products as general use.
Yes - MS has the right to change its software from version to version- That is fine. It will make people like it less
No - MS has the right to not make sure that each and every change to its software does not break some non-MS software- Not in an attempt to use their monopoly to leverage another market. When they market some of their software as a general purpose operating systems that other software companies can create applications on they don't have the right
But then again your are just a MICROSOFT TROLL.This bicycle is the perfect metaphor for Microsoft. It has changed the wheels from round to square and requires a special suface to be ridden on. The wheels represent a standard that has been embraced and extended. The road represents a "proprietary" system.
If I wasn't at work I would be rolling on the floor laughing.
Another Libertarian or Anarchist comment! There are some venues in which Government is the appropirate vehicle for regulation. As a previous poster pointed out, automobile safety (at least to a point) is appropriate. Another transportation venue is aviation. If companies/corporations were allowed to do whatever they wanted, aircraft would be falling out of the sky at many times the rate they are today (I am an aviator and aircraft owner). Medical and food safety is yet another. I am sure that if given a little more time and a long sheet of paper, I could come up with quite a few and justification to support them.
Please don't say the Market Place will fix the problem. That is another of the Libertarian Myths. The real Market Place is filled with fraud and coercion (i.e Enron, Worldcom, Tyco, etc.)which would roadblock fixes.
The parent to the prior message is a troll! Sun has a lot of code in it because they released it from closed source to open source. They did this after stripping out proprietary code (read 3rd party) that could not be released as OSS from StarOffice. They may add code in the future under the OSS Licence that OO is under.
There is not the potential here of another TSG fiasco as Sun has aknowledge the OSS release.
But is not a Libertarian anarchy either.
Methinks they protest too loudly! The only reason Microsoft is complaining so loudly is to look as though they have been punished. Often, a person who has been punished will act as if they received a great deal more than they actually did when they know that they should have received harsher punishment. Microsoft would probably be glad to pay the current fine if it would end their anti-trust problems permanently. If MS keeps getting the governments to enfore their monopoly we are all in trouble.
Additionally from some other articles on the EU/MS debacle, MS seems to think that their "IP" rights trump all law. Their power has become such that they feel they are beyond the reach of law.
Just to let off steam. What will it be like in 10-20 years when heart pacemakers are based on an MS OS. Will their EULA exclued failure of the device? Will untimely deaths due to the BSOD status (though there is no screen)just be swept under the carpet? If Microsoft has their way, which in the end I think they will buy from our governments the world over, we will all be at their mercy. They are as insidious as the worst governments.
NUKE REDMOND!(I mean this figuratively. You can say things like that in business; MS does. You know -- "knife the baby","cut off their air supply","cut them off at the knees".)
The above editorializing and rant were brought to you by all of the letters in the English alphabet, some numbers, and a few punctuation marks.
So you feel that when one goes through the portal at work they should be cut off from the rest of the world. You stated your point of view; therefore you may take this as a personal attack when it is only my counter to your view. You seem to be converting employment to time limited slavery ( a harsh but just word in this instance). Your "many,many workers" example fails as many many of these workers now have cell-phones and/or pagers to be able to have some degree of communication. They temper when they communicate with respect to their work.
I have read of instances where there were similar no communication policies and individuals were not notified of family members being ill, injured or even killed. In the last case the police showed up at the employers to notify the person. I am sure it was a very "good" work environment!
I work in a situation where cell-phones are allowed in some areas but not in others as a matter of security. Abuse of cell-phones is not tolerated but the use of cell-phones is fine. This is reasonable. If the poster of this article is stating a policy driven by a few peoples abuse of cell-phones, it is a draconian remedy to the situation. A reasonable employer will punish the abusers and continue on.
A big "but" can be inserted. If the original case has to do with work other than the employer's, I will say shame on him for wasting his employer's time. Otherwise he or she should seek exemption from the rule, a company cell-phone, or a company pager.
I have some questions on this.
Is this action only for those sold in France or for all IPODs sold everywhere?
While I have my suspicions of what the answers are, the article did not address them. The questions lead to some other thoughts
The USA applies the golden rule: He who has the gold rules.,/p>
Did you think I was going to say something about do unto others as you would have them do unto you. This country is headed to the corporatist state (and the ruling party doesn't matter -- they both give in to BIG business). This is just another step down that path.
Some things still exist even if they are anachronistic. There are some powerful players in the amature radio arena who desire to keep the service. By your reasoning, we should have no public parks, public roads, or other public properties as monied intrest have long salivated to turn these over to themselves.
Pfizer is pursuing just that. They are sueing another company that produces a drug that has the same effect as Viagra(TM) but is a completely different chemical.
- The derivitive work, AIX or DYNIX (containing SysV and IBM code), is to be treated as the original work per 2.01(OK by US copyright).
- AIX or DYNIX contain RCU, NUMA, JFS, etc. Linux also contains these.
- Here is source code (in C) from AIX, DYNIX, and Linux. See how they are similar in implementing these functions.
- Since AIX and DYNIX are to be treated as the original work (No. 1), see Judge, how they have stolen OUR code.
My butter anology:Darling McGroom has declared Habitat for Humanity an evil, unconstitutional plot to destroy the United States homebuilding industry. S/He/It has said that building houses using unpaid labor and donated materials to give to someone will take the United States under and should be banned. S/He/It has proposed that the minimum standard for housing in the country should be 3500 square feet (325 square meters) with many other luxuries situated on 1 acre (.4 hectare) of land. Additionally those that cannot afford this will just have to rough it.
In further discussion, DM indicated that s/he/it would like to have all charity outlawed as a detriment to business. In closing s/he/it said "Let them eat cake!".
You must be a Libertarian or quasi-Libertarian who has the wrong definition of greed. Greed is associated with excessiveness. Capatalism is based on want or desire for something better (i.e car, lifestyle) but not to the degree of excessiveness. Some people do excell and gain a great deal. This is still not greed. Unfortunately greed is a term that is based in ethical and moral philosophy. Most Libertarians eschew ethics and morals in business believing essentially in economic anarchy.
I find it best to define greed as having to lie, cheat or steal in a small way or a big way to gain your ends.
BTW, *weasel is a good name for you. You would probably take the coins off of a dead man's eyes for own ends.
Wonder why there were so many black cars in the first part of the 20th century. Henry Ford said that you could get a Model T Ford in any color as long as it was black. There were people wanting to get them in other colors but couldn't. They could not afford the other automobiles of the day. Therefore they did not want a black car but to get a car they had to have black.
This is analogous to the way MS products end up in users hands. If you want a personal computer but don't have a great deal of money to spend on it you end up with Intel(or similar) hardware and MS Windows OS. Why? Because that is the way they come.
The power levels of current BPL demonstration projects are so high in the local area that they over ride all but the most powerful signals. This has been confirmed by actual reception tests. Often all that can be heard are the 10 KW (thousand watt) shortwave stations; and they are noisy even then. The companies that are wanting to deploy BPL want even higher power levels than are currently allowed by FCC Part 15 regulations.
Another problem is that high frequency radio transmission as low as 100 watts can wipe out the BPL signals.
These two cannot survive together. Wideband digital transmissions have other mediums that they can use: optical fiber, coaxial cable, shielded twisted pairs, twisted pairs, microwave frequecies. There is only ONE high frequency radio environment.
BPL is just a non-starter.
"Someone skilled in the art"!
Seeing the preceeding article and this one gave rise to a thought. The reason for the delay in Longhorn where this file system will be introduced is that MS is trying to patent it so that no one else (read FOSS) can write drivers for it. Further lock-in to the MS world.
Microsoft can use this to completely monopolize the software market if in its broader scope it is enforceable. Hopefully it will be challenged in some manner and effectively anulled. However, if not, Microsoft will not allow any entity to do something that is encumbered by this patent unless they are using MS or MS approved software. This could mean the near death of all server OS's on the Net but MS's, and by consequence, all non MS OS's on the desktop. This is not just scary but outright, fundamentally disturbing.
'Cause, if you are an average Joe/Josephine using Linux on a Desktop/Laptop/Notebook Workstation which you shutdown after using it, you want faster boot times. I did a precursory read of the articles and this system (or similar) looks like a "good-thing" for Linux becoming more ubiquitous (everybody's OS) in the general Personal Computer market.
When I read a story like this I always think of Gomer Pyle's oft quoted statement:
"SUPRISE, SUPRISE, SUPRISE"
All OS's cost something to sustain. It is the cost of sustainment that is the important number. Licenses, support personnel, downtime, and other such things do add up. I've been involved with MS Window's based networks. The number of persons needed to provide support seems to be more. The difficulty in adding/updating software seems to cost more time (with MS OS's it must be done at a very off-schedule time since the system MUST be rebooted). Downtime from virii, worms, and program bugs/features due to the design of MS OS's seems to be more. I lost one days work due to the recent worms on MS even though I wasn't infected by them.
In general, after initial roll-out, Unix and like systems seem to require so much less support. And they are so much more remotely manageable.
If I had numbers I would use them. As an engineer subjective is not as good as objective in making a argument. But likewise butchered objective is worse than subjective.
"There are three kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, and statistics" - Benjamin Disraeli, Lord Courtney, Samuel Clemens
Ditch your radios dork and send the license back to Washington DC.
Corbis sues Amazon. Corbis is owned by Bill Gates who is also founder and a major stake/share holder in Microsoft. Amazon uses Linux to power its web site (I think this is a fact). Now if Amazon will just switch to Win2000, MS IIS, MS SQL Server, and other MS products the lawsuit will be quietly dropped. Could this be the real reason that the lawsuit was filed without first notifying Amazon to remove these items from sale.
IANAL and other disclaimers apply. I am just a thinking human being.
Bill G is equating Linux to OS/2 to get the suits making the acquisition/purchasing decisions to avoid it since Linux will obviously (according to Gates) go away in 10 years and not be a player. Nothing more than marketing FUD which he expects the above mentioned to belive and therefore bodyblock the use of Linux to make the FUD come true.
Your version of capitalism sounds more like what orgnized criminal groups do. Oh wait! Your a Libertarian. Not much difference.
The answer to the question posed is NO! Microsoft is out to demolish/destroy/strangle/kill (their words at one point or another) any and all competition. Their goal is to have an unchecked stanglehold on all computational machines from embedded computers to the functions now handled by mainframes. They have said that their only fair share is 100%. That might have sounded more like boast and bravado than their real goal when said but they have proven through further statments that truly is their goal. With the results of the anti-trust suit Microsoft has now been unleashed to do whatever they want.