I've been a reader of US News and World Report for 13 years (since I was 15, believe it or not), and they've always leaned to the right (guess where my politics lay).
I was very pleased to so this article and more so pleased that it was actually pretty acurate. I wasn't suprised, though: I expect as much from them.
Well, as far as the temperature goes: you could warm up your car before bringing the unit in.
It seems to me the idea is that you pop this thing in and out when you get in and leave your car. I wouldn't want this thing left in the car alone anyway: it's not theft resistant.
I am concerened about how it would handle shock. If I could be convinced this thing is sturdy, I'd consider it. As it stands I'm looking at the MD's for the car (already have the stereo and portable).
Actually, I think his supporters probably footed this bill under his exploratory committee. I don't think this "rich SOB" paid any money into his campaign yet: he's still figuring out if he can do his campaign without asking for government funds. George W. isn't that bad; he's at least smart enough to turn $600,000 into $14 million LEGALLY (but at taxpayer expense). All that Al Bore has managed to do is propose social agendas as a career politician. I'm still voting for Harry Browne, though.
Microsoft should be left alone to operate as it wishes, however its fraudulent practices must end. The issue isn't whether Microsoft has a monopoly on certain software, it is that it employs certain fraudlent practices to bring a product to market that is seemingly better than the competition. Granted, anyone that markets a product will claim that it is "the best", but noone has the right to claim that their product fufills a need when it clearly doesn't.
For example: the practice of announcing Vaporware is a fraudulent scheme. Leveraging their market presence, Microsoft would announce products (MS-DOS 5.0) that weren't under development to dissuade OEM's from purchasing products from other software companies. This is fraudulent.
Another fraudulent practice was to create misleading error messages designed to discourage use of other products. If you purchase a product that is designed to tell you something is wrong (my old Chrysler Laser did this), you would have a reasonable expectation that the errors given were not lies. This practice is fraudulent.
The practice of charging for bug fixes ("to fix this problem, you must upgrade")is another fraudulent device. What would happen if Chrysler charged to fix a recall?
The list goes on.
I believe that a breakup of Microsoft would only speed up the inevitable anyhow. Left to it's own devices, and assuming they stopped their fraudulent practices, Microsoft would probably have failed to maintain its monopoly in the coming years.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been a reader of US News and World Report for 13 years (since I was 15, believe it or not), and they've always leaned to the right (guess where my politics lay).
I was very pleased to so this article and more so pleased that it was actually pretty acurate. I wasn't suprised, though: I expect as much from them.
Well, as far as the temperature goes: you could warm up your car before bringing the unit in.
It seems to me the idea is that you pop this thing in and out when you get in and leave your car. I wouldn't want this thing left in the car alone anyway: it's not theft resistant.
I am concerened about how it would handle shock. If I could be convinced this thing is sturdy, I'd consider it. As it stands I'm looking at the MD's for the car (already have the stereo and portable).
Actually, I think his supporters probably footed this bill under his exploratory committee. I don't think this "rich SOB" paid any money into his campaign yet: he's still figuring out if he can do his campaign without asking for government funds. George W. isn't that bad; he's at least smart enough to turn $600,000 into $14 million LEGALLY (but at taxpayer expense). All that Al Bore has managed to do is propose social agendas as a career politician. I'm still voting for Harry Browne, though.
I'm not an economist, but:
Microsoft should be left alone to operate as it wishes, however its fraudulent practices must end. The issue isn't whether Microsoft has a monopoly on certain software, it is that it employs certain fraudlent practices to bring a product to market that is seemingly better than the competition. Granted, anyone that markets a product will claim that it is "the best", but noone has the right to claim that their product fufills a need when it clearly doesn't.
For example: the practice of announcing Vaporware is a fraudulent scheme. Leveraging their market presence, Microsoft would announce products (MS-DOS 5.0) that weren't under development to dissuade OEM's from purchasing products from other software companies. This is fraudulent.
Another fraudulent practice was to create misleading error messages designed to discourage use of other products. If you purchase a product that is designed to tell you something is wrong (my old Chrysler Laser did this), you would have a reasonable expectation that the errors given were not lies. This practice is fraudulent.
The practice of charging for bug fixes ("to fix this problem, you must upgrade")is another fraudulent device. What would happen if Chrysler charged to fix a recall?
The list goes on.
I believe that a breakup of Microsoft would only speed up the inevitable anyhow. Left to it's own devices, and assuming they stopped their fraudulent practices, Microsoft would probably have failed to maintain its monopoly in the coming years.
Of course, I could be wrong.