Germany. 1938. Walked all over Austria, Poland, France. It wasn't until they started intruding on American interests (e.g. commerce with a newly recognized USSR ) that the US got involved. Of course, this quickly changed to a policy of non-agression. In fact, the US never declared war on Germany. It was actually Germany (and Italy) that declared war on the US in response to the US' declaration of war on Japan. This, of course, was in response to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. The US Congress didn't declare war on Germany and Italy, instead merely "recognizing" that a state of war existed.
The point is, Germany went largely unchallenged for 5 years before the US got involved. Same thing with Japan. They conquered and expanded throughout Southeast Asia while the US maintained a position of isolation and apathy - even after a US gunboat was attacked by Japan off of the coast of China while providing aid to the Chinese. In fact, Japan attacked the US because America would not acquiesce to their plan for Asian domination. Realizing that war between Japan and the US was inevitable, Japan decided to strike first.
Eventually, the rest of the world will get fed up with our antics and stand up to us. Here's hoping that our leaders wise up and stop killing America before that happens.
The consulting industry has always been marred by those who got into it strictly for the money, who go from one contract to the next, chasing dollars, and who would drop a client at a heartbeat for a higher rate. People like this have always given the industry a bad name and were a big part of the backlash against consultants in the late 80's/early 90's (I know, I was there).
They want to leave? Let them. More jobs for the rest of us.
If you are the type that would check the URL then you would also be the type to realize that the bank, much less the FDIC and its affiliates, more than likely don't have your email address.
Not to mention the fact that the banks and government institutions always prefer to handle important correspondance via email rather than snail mail. [/sarcasm]
Then again, no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public. Especially not, it would seem, in Pakistan.
I wouldn't say that certs are completely without value. They sere two fundamental values. First, as a pre-screening criteria for hiring managers, they know that you have, at least, passed a minimum skills test. Second, when the decision is down between you and another person, with your resumes laying side-by-side, the certifications are going to come up as bonus points. Plus, and this is equally important, you can safely bet that the other applicant has certifications.
That said, I wouldn't get too stressed about renewing. I've yet to meet a hiring manager that has asked if a certification was still "valid".
I started working with COBOL in the mid-80's. When I moved to RPG II/III in 90 (around the same time as the introduction of RPG/400), I was estatic to get out of COBOL. Depending on the system and compiler, as well as the naming conventions in place, COBOL development can require all captitals. As I remember working on the Tandem VLX systems, there were columnar restructions as well.
RPG is actually quite easy to read once you get used to it. At least, RPG III is. RPG II, with its loop controls and indicators, was a bit more cryptic. I'm going waaaay back now so I may not be remembering the terminology correctly.
Of course, I started out in 6510 Assembler, so, to me at least, anything is easier to read.
The reason for case-sensitivity is rather simple when you consider how a compiler works. Each variable/constant name is converted to a token based on its ascii representation. As the letters 'a' and 'A' both have different ascii values, the amount of work required on the part of the compiler or at run-time to convert the cases would far exceed the inconvenience of not being allowed to munge the readibility of the code. Essentially, the compiler would have to shift the case of each letter of each variable (either to all lower or all upper) every time the code was compiled. Given that a program can contain hundreds of thousands of lines of code (if not millions), this can have a very significant impact on compilation time.
Interesting. I was modded a troll for saying that one could only hope that Longhorn will continue to slip.
I'll clarify. Given that my livelihood depends on software development, and given that proposed DRM controls in Longhorn threaten my ability to produce said software without license and approval from Microsoft (an expensive venture well out of my fiscal reach), yes, I hope that Longhorn never sees the light of day.
Go ahead and mod me a troll. I might not have cash to burn on the "Approved by Microsoft" DRM program, but at least I've got some karma.
I had not had an opportunity to read the Register article. I have now. I cannot find an admission from Mike Rowe that he intentionally tried to match Microsoft, as you claimed, but I understand your point. I will also admit that I had not read your most outer-level post as it wasn't even on the page. My response was made to another posting of yours, several levels in.
I have read through your posts, however, and while you consistently claim that Mike Rowe intended to capitalize on Microsoft's mark, you offer no proof of this (not even a link to the Register article that you claim to be quoting).
You also admit above that "I don't know what Mike Rowe intended to do with this domain". Clearly, you didn't bother to look at his site, his history, or his domain name registration. If you had, you would know that his intention is a website design company. The risk of trademark dilution here is very small given that they are not within the same product or service space. The only risk comes from the fact that they are in the same broad industry.
Let's shift gears a bit here. Traditionally, domain name disputes over trademarked names have arisen from cybersquatters grabbing up domain names. This is certainly not the case here, as the ownership of "microsoft.com" is not in question. Similarly, this is not the case of an "off-spelled" domain name. We aren't talking about "mircosoft" or the like. You really cannot make a compelling argument that mikerowesoft.com was registered with the sole intention of capturing traffic resulting from a misspelling of "microsoft." You assertion higher up that "Microsoft owns the trademark rights to the name "Microsoft" (or things that sound like it or are spelled like it)" is incorrect. They own "Microsoft", not its phonetic derivatives.
The domain, mikerowesoft.com, is being used in trade and in good faith (we'll get to the bad-faith claim in a second). It is based on an actual person's name. If the name was "mikerowedesign", you would have no issue. What is at issue here is the fact that "mikerowesoft" is phonetically similar to "microsoft". As for the bad faith argument, it will be very difficult for Microsoft to prove this. They approached him. He was already established in active trade. This is clearly not a case of cybersquatting.
The question remains: has something wrong been done? The essential question is this: Does a registered trademark apply to homophones? And, in this case, non-standard homophones.
I truly hope^H^H^Hexpect that the courts will determine that mikerowesoft.com is, in fact, not infringing on Microsoft's mark. If anyone has a ligitimate concern here, it would be Mike Rowe, since his customers, upon being given the web address verbally, are more likely to go to microsoft.com, than Microsoft's customers going to mikerowesoft.com.
>>firing off a bunch of trollish crap. Gee, this hurts, especially coming from someone who refers to others as "a know-it-all prick". You want to be taken seriously? Don't fall into the trap of self-righteous trollism. Take a look at the legal issues involved here - that of whether a phonetic derivitive is protected by a trademark.
Presumably, they want to re-work some of the game and networking code to prevent l33t 3xpLo145. Understandable since it's a safe enough bet that the cheating community has a copy of the internal workings.
I sincerely hope that you are being facecious and not merely looking to flamebait.
His name is Michael Rowe. He goes by the name "Mike". MikeRowe.com was taken as a domain name. He founded a software company. He calls it MikeRoweSoft Design. So, he registered MikeRoweSoft.com. He intentionally used a name that sounded like Microsoft? He used his OWN name!! How is this an attempt to capitalize on anything but his own name, given to him at BIRTH?
Many people use their own name when they start up a company. Joe's Plumbing. Bob Smith Electrical. And, yes, even Mike Rowe Software. When I started my first software company, I used the same exact naming convention- my name plus "Software". Had the Web been around at the time, I would have shortened the domain to "Soft". As for MikeRoweSoft.com, it's an amusing coincidence, but I'm willing to accept it as a coincidence and nothing else.
Microsoft knows that their argument is tenuous at best. Looking over the C&D letter, they claim that confusion could arise because Mike Rowe develops web sites and Microsoft has an application (FrontPage) that can be used to develop websites.
If nothing else, Microsoft is doing this because, as a trademark holder, they are legally obligated to make a fair and demonstrable effort to protect their trademarks. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Microsoft and Mike reach an accord whereby Mike can continue using his domain name with the agreement that he cannot develop a competing product (e.g. Operating Systems, Office Productivity Software) and market it through said domain.
6) Mike Rowe was born in 1984. Microsoft was founded in 1975, nine years before Mike Rowe was born. Clearly this was a blatant attempt on Mike Rowe's parents to infringe on Microsoft's trademark.
>>Mike Rowe intentionally registered the domain name "mikerowesoft.com" in order to use Microsoft's name
Not true. Mike Rowe registered his domain on 5 Aug 2003 as mikerowesoft.com presumably because mikerowe.com had been previously registered on 7 Feb 2002.
The only issue that I have had with Windows 2000 (and I've been on it since it was called NT 5) is that it won't run DOS games (e.g. Privateer).
Does anyone know if the compatibility mode in XP allows you to play some of the oldies? I'll push my luck and say in particular, Privateer, as I have yet to find a suitable replacement. (No, Freelancer didn't do it for me).
Using Set from the cmd line will only change the environment value for the duration of the cmd line session and will not propagate to the entire operating system as a whole. It is only good for that session and within that session.
Also, the ctrl+break combination is incorrect. It's the Windows key + Break.
Lastly, environment variables shouldn't be changed all that often. So, from a user interface view, they don't need to be readily accessible. If you know of a case where they do need to be changed frequently on a system level, I would be interested to know about it.
Slashdot Mirror
>>No other country could get away with that.
Germany. 1938. Walked all over Austria, Poland, France. It wasn't until they started intruding on American interests (e.g. commerce with a newly recognized USSR ) that the US got involved. Of course, this quickly changed to a policy of non-agression. In fact, the US never declared war on Germany. It was actually Germany (and Italy) that declared war on the US in response to the US' declaration of war on Japan. This, of course, was in response to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. The US Congress didn't declare war on Germany and Italy, instead merely "recognizing" that a state of war existed.
The point is, Germany went largely unchallenged for 5 years before the US got involved. Same thing with Japan. They conquered and expanded throughout Southeast Asia while the US maintained a position of isolation and apathy - even after a US gunboat was attacked by Japan off of the coast of China while providing aid to the Chinese. In fact, Japan attacked the US because America would not acquiesce to their plan for Asian domination. Realizing that war between Japan and the US was inevitable, Japan decided to strike first.
Eventually, the rest of the world will get fed up with our antics and stand up to us. Here's hoping that our leaders wise up and stop killing America before that happens.
Trust me, lad. You know not of what you speak.
The consulting industry has always been marred by those who got into it strictly for the money, who go from one contract to the next, chasing dollars, and who would drop a client at a heartbeat for a higher rate. People like this have always given the industry a bad name and were a big part of the backlash against consultants in the late 80's/early 90's (I know, I was there).
They want to leave? Let them. More jobs for the rest of us.
Apparently, you didn't read the EULA that indemnifies them of all liability.
The issue wasn't with his company's name which is "Mike Rowe Designs". It was with his domain name. He doesn't have to change his company's name.
If you are the type that would check the URL then you would also be the type to realize that the bank, much less the FDIC and its affiliates, more than likely don't have your email address.
Not to mention the fact that the banks and government institutions always prefer to handle important correspondance via email rather than snail mail. [/sarcasm]
Then again, no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public. Especially not, it would seem, in Pakistan.
I wouldn't say that certs are completely without value. They sere two fundamental values. First, as a pre-screening criteria for hiring managers, they know that you have, at least, passed a minimum skills test. Second, when the decision is down between you and another person, with your resumes laying side-by-side, the certifications are going to come up as bonus points. Plus, and this is equally important, you can safely bet that the other applicant has certifications.
That said, I wouldn't get too stressed about renewing. I've yet to meet a hiring manager that has asked if a certification was still "valid".
Good luck in your search.
Hmmm....a little background is required.
I'm old. There. I said it.
I started working with COBOL in the mid-80's. When I moved to RPG II/III in 90 (around the same time as the introduction of RPG/400), I was estatic to get out of COBOL. Depending on the system and compiler, as well as the naming conventions in place, COBOL development can require all captitals. As I remember working on the Tandem VLX systems, there were columnar restructions as well.
RPG is actually quite easy to read once you get used to it. At least, RPG III is. RPG II, with its loop controls and indicators, was a bit more cryptic. I'm going waaaay back now so I may not be remembering the terminology correctly.
Of course, I started out in 6510 Assembler, so, to me at least, anything is easier to read.
COBOL? ALL UPPER CASE AND ALL IN THE SAME COLUMNS. ;)
RPG is also very easy to read in that it is columnar, too.
Nothing, of course, "enforces" clean code. But that also depends on your definition of just what "clean" is.
The reason for case-sensitivity is rather simple when you consider how a compiler works. Each variable/constant name is converted to a token based on its ascii representation. As the letters 'a' and 'A' both have different ascii values, the amount of work required on the part of the compiler or at run-time to convert the cases would far exceed the inconvenience of not being allowed to munge the readibility of the code. Essentially, the compiler would have to shift the case of each letter of each variable (either to all lower or all upper) every time the code was compiled. Given that a program can contain hundreds of thousands of lines of code (if not millions), this can have a very significant impact on compilation time.
Lay off it. Even Microsoft said that they over-reacted.
h, @h. 0m7hn9 k 7h@7.
Interesting. I was modded a troll for saying that one could only hope that Longhorn will continue to slip.
I'll clarify. Given that my livelihood depends on software development, and given that proposed DRM controls in Longhorn threaten my ability to produce said software without license and approval from Microsoft (an expensive venture well out of my fiscal reach), yes, I hope that Longhorn never sees the light of day.
Go ahead and mod me a troll. I might not have cash to burn on the "Approved by Microsoft" DRM program, but at least I've got some karma.
I had not had an opportunity to read the Register article. I have now. I cannot find an admission from Mike Rowe that he intentionally tried to match Microsoft, as you claimed, but I understand your point. I will also admit that I had not read your most outer-level post as it wasn't even on the page. My response was made to another posting of yours, several levels in.
I have read through your posts, however, and while you consistently claim that Mike Rowe intended to capitalize on Microsoft's mark, you offer no proof of this (not even a link to the Register article that you claim to be quoting).
You also admit above that "I don't know what Mike Rowe intended to do with this domain". Clearly, you didn't bother to look at his site, his history, or his domain name registration. If you had, you would know that his intention is a website design company. The risk of trademark dilution here is very small given that they are not within the same product or service space. The only risk comes from the fact that they are in the same broad industry.
Let's shift gears a bit here. Traditionally, domain name disputes over trademarked names have arisen from cybersquatters grabbing up domain names. This is certainly not the case here, as the ownership of "microsoft.com" is not in question. Similarly, this is not the case of an "off-spelled" domain name. We aren't talking about "mircosoft" or the like. You really cannot make a compelling argument that mikerowesoft.com was registered with the sole intention of capturing traffic resulting from a misspelling of "microsoft." You assertion higher up that "Microsoft owns the trademark rights to the name "Microsoft" (or things that sound like it or are spelled like it)" is incorrect. They own "Microsoft", not its phonetic derivatives.
The domain, mikerowesoft.com, is being used in trade and in good faith (we'll get to the bad-faith claim in a second). It is based on an actual person's name. If the name was "mikerowedesign", you would have no issue. What is at issue here is the fact that "mikerowesoft" is phonetically similar to "microsoft". As for the bad faith argument, it will be very difficult for Microsoft to prove this. They approached him. He was already established in active trade. This is clearly not a case of cybersquatting.
The question remains: has something wrong been done? The essential question is this: Does a registered trademark apply to homophones? And, in this case, non-standard homophones.
I truly hope^H^H^Hexpect that the courts will determine that mikerowesoft.com is, in fact, not infringing on Microsoft's mark. If anyone has a ligitimate concern here, it would be Mike Rowe, since his customers, upon being given the web address verbally, are more likely to go to microsoft.com, than Microsoft's customers going to mikerowesoft.com.
>>firing off a bunch of trollish crap.
Gee, this hurts, especially coming from someone who refers to others as "a know-it-all prick". You want to be taken seriously? Don't fall into the trap of self-righteous trollism. Take a look at the legal issues involved here - that of whether a phonetic derivitive is protected by a trademark.
>>and the ever-slipping ship date for Longhorn
One can only hope.
Presumably, they want to re-work some of the game and networking code to prevent l33t 3xpLo145. Understandable since it's a safe enough bet that the cheating community has a copy of the internal workings.
I sincerely hope that you are being facecious and not merely looking to flamebait.
His name is Michael Rowe. He goes by the name "Mike". MikeRowe.com was taken as a domain name. He founded a software company. He calls it MikeRoweSoft Design. So, he registered MikeRoweSoft.com. He intentionally used a name that sounded like Microsoft? He used his OWN name!! How is this an attempt to capitalize on anything but his own name, given to him at BIRTH?
Many people use their own name when they start up a company. Joe's Plumbing. Bob Smith Electrical. And, yes, even Mike Rowe Software. When I started my first software company, I used the same exact naming convention- my name plus "Software". Had the Web been around at the time, I would have shortened the domain to "Soft". As for MikeRoweSoft.com, it's an amusing coincidence, but I'm willing to accept it as a coincidence and nothing else.
Microsoft knows that their argument is tenuous at best. Looking over the C&D letter, they claim that confusion could arise because Mike Rowe develops web sites and Microsoft has an application (FrontPage) that can be used to develop websites.
If nothing else, Microsoft is doing this because, as a trademark holder, they are legally obligated to make a fair and demonstrable effort to protect their trademarks. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Microsoft and Mike reach an accord whereby Mike can continue using his domain name with the agreement that he cannot develop a competing product (e.g. Operating Systems, Office Productivity Software) and market it through said domain.
Yeah.
Tell that to Uzi Nissan.
6) Mike Rowe was born in 1984. Microsoft was founded in 1975, nine years before Mike Rowe was born. Clearly this was a blatant attempt on Mike Rowe's parents to infringe on Microsoft's trademark.
>>Mike Rowe intentionally registered the domain name "mikerowesoft.com" in order to use Microsoft's name
Not true. Mike Rowe registered his domain on 5 Aug 2003 as mikerowesoft.com presumably because mikerowe.com had been previously registered on 7 Feb 2002.
Your point? Google does soundex searches to account for misspellings.
>> the ads will play regardless of pop-up blocking.
I love a challenge.
Presumably, the ads are coming from a small group of centralized servers (unicast), so it's nothing that can't be blocked at the firewall.
I doubt that these are going to fly, anyway. At 300k per download for a 15 sec spot, they're going to be alienating a lot of dial-up users.
You must be thinking of Henry Fjord.
The only issue that I have had with Windows 2000 (and I've been on it since it was called NT 5) is that it won't run DOS games (e.g. Privateer).
Does anyone know if the compatibility mode in XP allows you to play some of the oldies? I'll push my luck and say in particular, Privateer, as I have yet to find a suitable replacement. (No, Freelancer didn't do it for me).
Using Set from the cmd line will only change the environment value for the duration of the cmd line session and will not propagate to the entire operating system as a whole. It is only good for that session and within that session.
Also, the ctrl+break combination is incorrect. It's the Windows key + Break.
Lastly, environment variables shouldn't be changed all that often. So, from a user interface view, they don't need to be readily accessible. If you know of a case where they do need to be changed frequently on a system level, I would be interested to know about it.