This guy isn't really in a position to make such a claim. He seems to be making this statement in hopes that he gets his way.
But the people who create the music are the ones who decide in what format that music is distributed.
And then to top it off, if the music creators can convince Congress to extend the Copyright law to extend beyond music recording devices to cover MP3... the war is lost.
Of course this wasn't '91... I was primarily working with the 6.0 version in and around '93/'94. We had a lot of problems with it, not so much Windows 3.1 as just memory handling, etc.
It just had some funky stuff to it, and DOS 6.0 was a lot cleaner to install and use.
Microsoft's response was something like "We will support it when there is a standard. As of right now all support for IPv6 from other vendors is still pre-beta, and we don't see any point in wasting our time with that in a shipping product."
The consulting company I work for just dropped their Notes practice because of lack of work out there. There aren't any new companies looking to deploy Notes or develop on it.
Most companies have adopted intranets instead, and all new development is going that route, primarily because you don't need special Notes clients on the desktop.
Domino was Lotus' attempt to follow the intranet craze. However the previous version of Domino was a huge resource hog. This latest version is supposed to be pretty cool, and will likely find some use, but...
It's too little, too late. Notes is pretty much dead for new installations. The only business it has now is some upgrades.
So I say again... Who cares?
A company two steps away from the grave supports Linux. Whoopdedo. You think there are any big Linux fans who are going to propose Domino over rolling something with Apache?
This is nothing new, and there have been numerous cases involving this.
If you are going to link to another site, then the other site should show up in the entire browser, or you should open a new browser. You shouldn't embed it into a frame.
Well first of all, it makes it painful for the end user to bookmark the site.
And second of all, it gives the impression that your site is responsible for the content in some capacity, and frankly I agree it is a violation of copyright law.
This is a non issue, why the slashdot article for it?
First of all, I don't even know who Jesse Berst is, why would he declare W2K, and who is listening to him anyway?
Second... W2K does address issues of stability and TCO.
Third... Microsoft is smart enough to know that web servers aren't a money making market. IIS is just a link in the chain. They'll continue to give it away for free, and then integrate nice easy hooks into it to make publishing with Office the next best thing since sliced bread, which will encourage Office and NT sales...
Fourth... ActiveX is incredibly useful for internal application development. You need to first be familiar with Windows DNA and COM to understand.
The thing a lot of people don't seem to understand is that Microsoft and IIS is #1 for corporate intranet web and application deployment.
The internet world is different, requiring totally different feature sets than intranet requires.
But one would assume that a development company like Microsoft would have had access to a hard drive.
I don't know, I guess I was just throwing that out as a possibility. I wasn't paying close enough attention to the movie to see what kind of computer he was using.
I've always enjoyed Metcalfe's columns. He's bright, intelligent, and sees things from a different perspective than most of the other media shills.
I don't necessarily agree with him, and over the last year I think the pay-as-you-go internet columns have been quite boring.
So it's nice to see him being a little bit controversial in a different topic.
But I have to agree. The 60's back-to-earth communist movement doesn't appeal to me. I just want software that works, and does cool stuff.
This weekend I installed Windows 2000 Server Beta-3 on one of my home machines.
And let me just sum up my experience with this beta:
Linux does not have a chance.
W2K incorporates everything that every Unix zealot has ever complained about, along with everything that every Microsoft admin has complained about. It's frankly just seriously cool.
And not just because of the smoke and mirrors(i.e. Gnome and Enlightenment), but because of the technical details.
By this time next year Linux will have the same position in the media as OS/2 has now. Good luck to you in finding new jobs!
Several people have commented that Gates sat in front of a computer with a C> prompt and somehow this was out of sequence.
CP/M used a C> prompt... CP/M was originally written for the Altair. And then later became the dominate OS on hardware from Cromemco(which was important in Gates career and not mentioned:(), Osborne, Morrow, Kaypro, Northstar, etc. Microsoft and Gates were selling CP/M software... MS-BASIC, Macro-Assembler, I believe they even had a C compiler at the time.
I am not sure about the historical accuracy of the meeting with IBM. My understanding was that IBM approached Microsoft, not the other way around. This was after Kildall had blown them off when IBM asked to have CP/M ported.
As far as the theft from Xerox and whether it was theft or not. This was all covered in the court case back in 1994 or so when Apple sued Microsoft. Microsoft won the court case, and I believe one of the aspects was that since Apple did not originate the ideas they had no property rights to protect. Those rights belonged to Xerox who wasn't involved in the lawsuit. (as far as I remember)
I thought it was entertaining. Hall did a wonderful Gates impersonation!
But my favorite line in the whole film was when they were at the unveiling of the Mac and Ballmer turns to Gates and says "Since when did this stop becoming a business, and start becoming a religion?"
Correct. The Mac was introduced in 1984. However Windows 3.0 wasn't introduced until like 1990. The first couple versions sucked pretty hard.
It wasn't until the release of Windows 3.1 in around 1991 that Microsoft dominated the playing field.
On the other hand from 1985-1990 the Mac faced competition from the Amiga and other home computers. And it's funny that Jobs says "We're Better", when the Amiga was better than all of them at the time.:)
Good grief, even discounting the fourteen gazillion million Intel based machines...
The best selling computer has been the Commodore-64 for quite a long time, having sold something like 15-20 million of the buggers over the course of it's lifetime.
Umm, I think you need to read the original comment I responded to. He was talking about copy protection scheme that was licensed to a particular player... i.e. DIVX.
DVD is copy protected in that you cannot make a digital copy of it. But you can take your original media and play it on a different player, or give it to a friend who can play it on her player, etc.
The people collecting these MP3's and thinking that they sound like CD, are the same people stupid enough to blow $400 on a set of "high quality" computer speakers.
Slashdot Mirror
This guy isn't really in a position to make such a claim. He seems to be making this statement in hopes that he gets his way.
But the people who create the music are the ones who decide in what format that music is distributed.
And then to top it off, if the music creators can convince Congress to extend the Copyright law to extend beyond music recording devices to cover MP3... the war is lost.
It's actually $199 + $20*24 = $679.
Bleah, now if they sold it without the internet access I would buy.
It's just a Linux WebTV.
How exactly was DR-DOS not compatible? We were using Windows 3.1 under DR-DOS in '93/'94 and it worked.
Our problems were just with the other fuggly stuff that DR included.
Or are you just talking the drive compression software? I guess I was using Superstor at the time, so didn't see this problem.
That was not my experience with DR-DOS.
Of course this wasn't '91... I was primarily working with the 6.0 version in and around '93/'94. We had a lot of problems with it, not so much Windows 3.1 as just memory handling, etc.
It just had some funky stuff to it, and DOS 6.0 was a lot cleaner to install and use.
Only problem with this is that DR-DOS wasn't really a very good product.
:(
We tried to use it at work, and just had quite a few problems with it. Things not working, difficult memory config setup, etc.
It's hard to say what had the most impact on DR-DOS... Microsoft or it's poor quality.
BTW, the article is wrong on one count. Digital Research did pursue GUI, but they did it with GEM. This was part of the Atari ST OS.
We asked about this at a recent conference.
Microsoft's response was something like "We will support it when there is a standard. As of right now all support for IPv6 from other vendors is still pre-beta, and we don't see any point in wasting our time with that in a shipping product."
cc:Mail is a different product entirely. It was a predecessor of Notes.
Although Lotus has done a lot in terms of interoperability of cc:Mail with Notes/Domino.
Yes, there are some large cc:Mail installations out there. But again I doubt this brings in a lot of "new" business.
Well I do know something about it.
The consulting company I work for just dropped their Notes practice because of lack of work out there. There aren't any new companies looking to deploy Notes or develop on it.
Most companies have adopted intranets instead, and all new development is going that route, primarily because you don't need special Notes clients on the desktop.
Domino was Lotus' attempt to follow the intranet craze. However the previous version of Domino was a huge resource hog. This latest version is supposed to be pretty cool, and will likely find some use, but...
It's too little, too late. Notes is pretty much dead for new installations. The only business it has now is some upgrades.
So I say again... Who cares?
A company two steps away from the grave supports Linux. Whoopdedo. You think there are any big Linux fans who are going to propose Domino over rolling something with Apache?
Highly doubtful.
But we'll see.
This is nothing new, and there have been numerous cases involving this.
If you are going to link to another site, then the other site should show up in the entire browser, or you should open a new browser. You shouldn't embed it into a frame.
Well first of all, it makes it painful for the end user to bookmark the site.
And second of all, it gives the impression that your site is responsible for the content in some capacity, and frankly I agree it is a violation of copyright law.
This is a non issue, why the slashdot article for it?
Why is it that every company we see who is suddenly "bullish" about Linux is about two steps away from the grave.
Lotus Notes is near death... Domino is going nowhere.
Who cares?
First of all, I don't even know who Jesse Berst is, why would he declare W2K, and who is listening to him anyway?
Second... W2K does address issues of stability and TCO.
Third... Microsoft is smart enough to know that web servers aren't a money making market. IIS is just a link in the chain. They'll continue to give it away for free, and then integrate nice easy hooks into it to make publishing with Office the next best thing since sliced bread, which will encourage Office and NT sales...
Fourth... ActiveX is incredibly useful for internal application development. You need to first be familiar with Windows DNA and COM to understand.
The thing a lot of people don't seem to understand is that Microsoft and IIS is #1 for corporate intranet web and application deployment.
The internet world is different, requiring totally different feature sets than intranet requires.
Thompson said that only about 3-4 months ago.
Just try to make sense of sendmail.cf without an O'Reilly book, or a trip to the psycho ward at the local hospital.
Besides... sendmail is also a commercial product... www.sendmail.com which has many improvements over the OSS version.
True. I never had a harddrive on a CP/M machine.
But one would assume that a development company like Microsoft would have had access to a hard drive.
I don't know, I guess I was just throwing that out as a possibility. I wasn't paying close enough attention to the movie to see what kind of computer he was using.
I've always enjoyed Metcalfe's columns. He's bright, intelligent, and sees things from a different perspective than most of the other media shills.
I don't necessarily agree with him, and over the last year I think the pay-as-you-go internet columns have been quite boring.
So it's nice to see him being a little bit controversial in a different topic.
But I have to agree. The 60's back-to-earth communist movement doesn't appeal to me. I just want software that works, and does cool stuff.
This weekend I installed Windows 2000 Server Beta-3 on one of my home machines.
And let me just sum up my experience with this beta:
Linux does not have a chance.
W2K incorporates everything that every Unix zealot has ever complained about, along with everything that every Microsoft admin has complained about. It's frankly just seriously cool.
And not just because of the smoke and mirrors(i.e. Gnome and Enlightenment), but because of the technical details.
By this time next year Linux will have the same position in the media as OS/2 has now. Good luck to you in finding new jobs!
Several people have commented that Gates sat in front of a computer with a C> prompt and somehow this was out of sequence.
:(), Osborne, Morrow, Kaypro, Northstar, etc. Microsoft and Gates were selling CP/M software... MS-BASIC, Macro-Assembler, I believe they even had a C compiler at the time.
CP/M used a C> prompt... CP/M was originally written for the Altair. And then later became the dominate OS on hardware from Cromemco(which was important in Gates career and not mentioned
I am not sure about the historical accuracy of the meeting with IBM. My understanding was that IBM approached Microsoft, not the other way around. This was after Kildall had blown them off when IBM asked to have CP/M ported.
As far as the theft from Xerox and whether it was theft or not. This was all covered in the court case back in 1994 or so when Apple sued Microsoft. Microsoft won the court case, and I believe one of the aspects was that since Apple did not originate the ideas they had no property rights to protect. Those rights belonged to Xerox who wasn't involved in the lawsuit. (as far as I remember)
I thought it was entertaining. Hall did a wonderful Gates impersonation!
But my favorite line in the whole film was when they were at the unveiling of the Mac and Ballmer turns to Gates and says "Since when did this stop becoming a business, and start becoming a religion?"
Correct. The Mac was introduced in 1984. However Windows 3.0 wasn't introduced until like 1990. The first couple versions sucked pretty hard.
:)
It wasn't until the release of Windows 3.1 in around 1991 that Microsoft dominated the playing field.
On the other hand from 1985-1990 the Mac faced competition from the Amiga and other home computers. And it's funny that Jobs says "We're Better", when the Amiga was better than all of them at the time.
WarGames was fun, as long as you ignored some of the glaring technical merits of the film.
:)
Such as the fact that Broderick had about $10k of computer equipment in his bedroom, with no explanation of where he struck it rich.
Well after watching it for the 2nd time, they played Weird Science.
:)
Good grief, even discounting the fourteen gazillion million Intel based machines...
The best selling computer has been the Commodore-64 for quite a long time, having sold something like 15-20 million of the buggers over the course of it's lifetime.
Umm, I think you need to read the original comment I responded to. He was talking about copy protection scheme that was licensed to a particular player... i.e. DIVX.
DVD is copy protected in that you cannot make a digital copy of it. But you can take your original media and play it on a different player, or give it to a friend who can play it on her player, etc.
It'll never fly. The consumers have proven that they won't buy into schemes like that.
The people collecting these MP3's and thinking that they sound like CD, are the same people stupid enough to blow $400 on a set of "high quality" computer speakers.
They very likely don't know what they're missing.
So if I setup a server with RedHat, and someone uses a security hole to get access RedHat will pay me back for the effort required to fix the damage?
I didn't realize that. Do the other Linux distribution people do this as well? How can Debian afford this?
http://www.microsoft.com/security/bulletins/ms99-0 19.asp
Says it was originally posted May 27th, and updated today.
The email to NTBUGTRAQ came out just after 4pm, it's 9pm now.
I'd say that's fast enough for the average mortal.