Hmm... kinda' sounds similar to the LNUX (Slashdot owner) 10Q....
IF WE FAIL TO ADEQUATELY PROTECT OUR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS, COMPETITORS MAY USE OUR TECHNOLOGY AND TRADEMARKS, WHICH COULD WEAKEN OUR COMPETITIVE POSITION, REDUCE OUR REVENUES, AND INCREASE OUR COSTS. We rely on a combination of copyright, trademark, patent and trade-secret laws, employee and third-party nondisclosure agreements, and other arrangements to protect our proprietary rights. Despite these precautions, it may be possible for unauthorized third parties to copy our products or obtain and use information that we regard as proprietary to create products that compete against ours. Some license provisions protecting against unauthorized use, copying, transfer, and disclosure of our licensed programs may be unenforceable under the laws of certain jurisdictions and foreign countries.
In addition, the laws of some countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent as do the laws of the United States. To the extent that we increase our international activities, our exposure to unauthorized copying and use of our products and proprietary information will increase.
Our collection of trademarks is important to our business. The protective steps we take or have taken may be inadequate to deter misappropriation of our trademark rights. We have filed applications for registration of some of our trademarks in the United States and internationally. Effective trademark protection may not be available in every country in which we offer or intend to offer our products and services. Failure to protect our trademark rights adequately could damage our brand identity and impair our ability to compete effectively. Furthermore, defending or enforcing our trademark rights could result in the expenditure of significant financial and managerial resources.
The scope of United States patent protection in the software industry is not well defined and will evolve as the United States Patent and Trademark Office grants additional patents. Because patent applications in the United States are not publicly disclosed until the patent is issued, applications may have been filed that would relate to our products.
Our success depends significantly upon our proprietary technology. Despite our efforts to protect our proprietary technology, it may be possible for unauthorized third parties to copy certain portions of our products or to reverse engineer or otherwise obtain and use our proprietary information. We do not have any software patents, and existing copyright laws afford only limited protection. In addition, we cannot be certain that others will not develop substantially equivalent or superseding proprietary technology, or that equivalent products will not be marketed in competition with our products, thereby substantially reducing the value of our proprietary rights. We cannot assure you that we will develop proprietary products or technologies that are patentable, that any patent, if issued, would provide us with any competitive advantages or would not be challenged by third parties, or that the patents of others will not adversely affect our ability to do business. Litigation may be necessary to protect our proprietary technology. This litigation may be time-consuming and expensive.
It's not the users' fault. Kids with nothing but time and money cause these attacks. THEY are the criminals. Lock 'em up and throw away the key. This has got to be one of the stupidest ideas coming out of gov't in a long time, and we all know how many stupid ideas come from the gov't. Start doing this, and the Net very quickly becomes a gov't controlled entity, making the "Digital Divide" absolutely huge. And it's not necessarily the software makers' fault. They may have genuinely missed it through no fault of their own. It may not be negligence at all. Besides, suing the companies would instantly put every Linux distribution out of business, since most of them are just barely hanging on as is.
Screw file trading. Canada is more free in ways that *really* matter, like drugs. In Canada, if you want to ingest pot, you can without being arrested by jack-booted Ashcroft thugs and thrown in prison for the rest of your life. On that same subject, their gov't isn't still feeding them the "Reefer Madness" bullshit from the 20's. Canada seems to be a lot better in other ways too. Just watch "Bowling for Columbine"...
After years of listening to NPR, I had to stop. NPR does a blow-by-blow of the (thousand?) year long Isreal-Palestine conflict. Yes, I know they don't get along. They kill each other. They fight. It's been this way for hundreds if not thousands of years. I don't give a shit who killed who today.
Freedom for you to choose when, how and under which terms you update your software.
When I want to update my software, I go to the store and buy it. Am I really not doing this under my own free will? Is it pre-determined by fate? If this is what you're arguing, then this might take a while.
Freedom to re-install your software wherever you want (no more hardware locked OSes).
Didn't know about this. If I need to whack W2K, I whack it and start over (haven't done this in many, many years, but I don't remember a problem).
Freedom from harrasment by MS sponsored pseudo-auditors.
Never spoke with any kind of auditors, sorry.
Freedom of choice between different suppliers without the need to migrate *your* data.
I switch suppliers all of the time. What does that have to do with Windows? I just stop buying from one company, and start buying from another. I just switched a supplier last week, in fact.
Not all the advantages and differences are technical or related to usability. There are other issues that may be far more important.
You see,/. kiddies... any time there are corporate lawsuits, there are often many various suits filed by several parties. This is common. Unless you're a lawyer who's specifically working on these suits, I have no idea how this is "news". Just let us know when it's over. A blow-by-blow account of a corporate legal battle is about as exciting as NPR.
And that target market is what, exactly? 100 lb weaklings that can't carry a 5 lb computer? Oh wait. My fault. Girls. Little girls. That's the target market. Makes sense now. Sorry for this interruption.
Because, in larger business environments, they suck.
Ah, now that clears things up. Very "insightful". That's about as convincing as those stupid election posters by the side of the road that just have the person's name on it.
What's the point to an alternative? What need does this fill or what problem does this fix? The desktop OS is by and large a non-issue. It works and it works well. Trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist is a sure fire way to fail a business. Just like E-books. What was the fucking point? There's nothing wrong with traditional books, and E-books added little if any value. I just don't see the fucking point any more. Quit beating a dead horse.
Do tell. In fact, you have no idea what I do for a living, and your assumptions are laughable from where I am sitting. In fact, "free as in freedom" is directly applicable to the bottom line when you can control the destiny of the software your business depends on. While Microsoft tells you where you are going today, those who control their own software get to make that business decision themselves.
And THAT is what helps you pay your bills.
"control the destiny of the software"? For one thing, I can tell that you don't run any kind of business. This is just laughable. Microsoft doesn't have any say over what software I install on my computer, so your spouting is largely irrelevant. I make software buying decisions based on many economic factors, but "controlling destiny" doesn't generally come into play. Things like initial cost, maintenance, training, support, downtime, possible upgrades, etc are things that I consider when I buy software. "Freedom" is something that people with excess disposable income can slap themselves on the back about. Those of us living in the real world don't have that luxury.
I'm glad that Opera, Mozilla...etc,etc,etc and Apache server kept Microsoft from controlling the HTML standards completely!!
Apache, maybe (although I have no idea what Apache has to do with HTML), but Opera and Mozilla? Are you fucking kidding? With something along the lines of 3% usage, how can you say they've had *anything* to do with influencing standards? That's insane.
No, YOU don't get it. You obviously don't run a business. Principles like "free as in freedom" don't come into play when you're talking about the bottom line. That's a very, very naive viewpoint. I don't give a flying shit about "free as in freedom" when I have bills to pay, and I doubt that most other companies, unless they're awash in profits, do either.
The article says essentially, "Microsoft has competition". It doesn't imply, nor do I believe, that they're in any trouble whatsoever. They're just not able to stomp all over the competition so freely anymore (although, they do still stomp the shit out of Linux in 99% of their markets, I'm sure).
Let's kill all these plugins, and have support for open standards within the browser
Unless your name is "Bill Gates", the chances of "us" doing this is about zero. The "other" browsers have virtually no impact any more. Game over. Whatever "standards" that a 3rd party came up with are completely irrelevant. I've argued that they've been irrelevant for several years now, in fact. Whatever IE does is the de-facto standard, no matter what the/. zealots think. You might as well say, "Let's change the Earth's gravity". Sorry dude, it ain't gonna happen.
All these things are done to help enhance the safety of everyone using the medium.
Right. Safety. Safety in real life. Drive a car or fly a plane badly, and you can kill other people. People don't die via the Net. "Safety" on line is not life or death... it's just a possible annoyance.
I haven't seen $2.10/gallon for gas in a long, long, long time, but even so, is never getting laid, and not enjoying your car worth almost $1K/year? I kinda' doubt that. If I had to drive one of those little tin cans every day, I'd have to spend $50/month on anti-depressants and $500/month on hookers, which would make that car significantly more expensive.
VW's are not gay. An old woman's car they may be, but not a gay man's car. Consider the Mitsubishi Eclipse--it is by far the gayest car, in terms of being desired and driven by homosexual men.
In my area, it's young girls (late teens, early 20's) and gay men. Period. A few old women drive the beetles, but primarily, girls and gay men. In my area, I don't see a lot of gay men driving Eclipses.
I agreee 100%. A few pennies here and there on saved gas isn't worth it to me to buy a car that costs more, looks like shit, doesn't perform, and is expensive to fix. The only people who should buy these cars are tree-huggers.
I mean, the numbers aren't from Bruce Perens or ESR or RMS, so I don't trust them. Besides, how do we REALLY know this article was put on that web server, by the owners, and it's not just another hacked W2K/IIS box. And besides, the article didn't even mention anything about standard deviations, so the statistics are 100% wrong. Besides, I read the article with IE, so I'm sure that IE manipulated the numbers that I saw. Besides... oh fucking give it up, zealots. Linux isn't as rock solid 100% secure as everybody claims it to be. It's just as hackable as W2K. Crawl back under your rocks, now.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm... kinda' sounds similar to the LNUX (Slashdot owner) 10Q....
IF WE FAIL TO ADEQUATELY PROTECT OUR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS, COMPETITORS MAY USE OUR TECHNOLOGY AND TRADEMARKS, WHICH COULD WEAKEN OUR COMPETITIVE POSITION, REDUCE OUR REVENUES, AND INCREASE OUR COSTS. We rely on a combination of copyright, trademark, patent and trade-secret laws, employee and third-party nondisclosure agreements, and other arrangements to protect our proprietary rights. Despite these precautions, it may be possible for unauthorized third parties to copy our products or obtain and use information that we regard as proprietary to create products that compete against ours. Some license provisions protecting against unauthorized use, copying, transfer, and disclosure of our licensed programs may be unenforceable under the laws of certain jurisdictions and foreign countries.
In addition, the laws of some countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent as do the laws of the United States. To the extent that we increase our international activities, our exposure to unauthorized copying and use of our products and proprietary information will increase.
Our collection of trademarks is important to our business. The protective steps we take or have taken may be inadequate to deter misappropriation of our trademark rights. We have filed applications for registration of some of our trademarks in the United States and internationally. Effective trademark protection may not be available in every country in which we offer or intend to offer our products and services. Failure to protect our trademark rights adequately could damage our brand identity and impair our ability to compete effectively. Furthermore, defending or enforcing our trademark rights could result in the expenditure of significant financial and managerial resources.
The scope of United States patent protection in the software industry is not well defined and will evolve as the United States Patent and Trademark Office grants additional patents. Because patent applications in the United States are not publicly disclosed until the patent is issued, applications may have been filed that would relate to our products.
Our success depends significantly upon our proprietary technology. Despite our efforts to protect our proprietary technology, it may be possible for unauthorized third parties to copy certain portions of our products or to reverse engineer or otherwise obtain and use our proprietary information. We do not have any software patents, and existing copyright laws afford only limited protection. In addition, we cannot be certain that others will not develop substantially equivalent or superseding proprietary technology, or that equivalent products will not be marketed in competition with our products, thereby substantially reducing the value of our proprietary rights. We cannot assure you that we will develop proprietary products or technologies that are patentable, that any patent, if issued, would provide us with any competitive advantages or would not be challenged by third parties, or that the patents of others will not adversely affect our ability to do business. Litigation may be necessary to protect our proprietary technology. This litigation may be time-consuming and expensive.
Broadband (MUCH faster than cable or most DSL) was a one time outlay of $100 with $0/month. I love wireless.
It's not the users' fault. Kids with nothing but time and money cause these attacks. THEY are the criminals. Lock 'em up and throw away the key. This has got to be one of the stupidest ideas coming out of gov't in a long time, and we all know how many stupid ideas come from the gov't. Start doing this, and the Net very quickly becomes a gov't controlled entity, making the "Digital Divide" absolutely huge. And it's not necessarily the software makers' fault. They may have genuinely missed it through no fault of their own. It may not be negligence at all. Besides, suing the companies would instantly put every Linux distribution out of business, since most of them are just barely hanging on as is.
Screw file trading. Canada is more free in ways that *really* matter, like drugs. In Canada, if you want to ingest pot, you can without being arrested by jack-booted Ashcroft thugs and thrown in prison for the rest of your life. On that same subject, their gov't isn't still feeding them the "Reefer Madness" bullshit from the 20's.
Canada seems to be a lot better in other ways too. Just watch "Bowling for Columbine"...
After years of listening to NPR, I had to stop. NPR does a blow-by-blow of the (thousand?) year long Isreal-Palestine conflict. Yes, I know they don't get along. They kill each other. They fight. It's been this way for hundreds if not thousands of years. I don't give a shit who killed who today.
Freedom for you to choose when, how and under which terms you update your software.
When I want to update my software, I go to the store and buy it. Am I really not doing this under my own free will? Is it pre-determined by fate? If this is what you're arguing, then this might take a while.
Freedom to re-install your software wherever you want (no more hardware locked OSes).
Didn't know about this. If I need to whack W2K, I whack it and start over (haven't done this in many, many years, but I don't remember a problem).
Freedom from harrasment by MS sponsored pseudo-auditors.
Never spoke with any kind of auditors, sorry.
Freedom of choice between different suppliers without the need to migrate *your* data.
I switch suppliers all of the time. What does that have to do with Windows? I just stop buying from one company, and start buying from another. I just switched a supplier last week, in fact.
Not all the advantages and differences are technical or related to usability. There are other issues that may be far more important.
Like what?
You see, /. kiddies... any time there are corporate lawsuits, there are often many various suits filed by several parties. This is common. Unless you're a lawyer who's specifically working on these suits, I have no idea how this is "news". Just let us know when it's over. A blow-by-blow account of a corporate legal battle is about as exciting as NPR.
And that target market is what, exactly? 100 lb weaklings that can't carry a 5 lb computer? Oh wait. My fault. Girls. Little girls. That's the target market. Makes sense now. Sorry for this interruption.
Because, in larger business environments, they suck.
Ah, now that clears things up. Very "insightful". That's about as convincing as those stupid election posters by the side of the road that just have the person's name on it.
What's the point to an alternative? What need does this fill or what problem does this fix? The desktop OS is by and large a non-issue. It works and it works well. Trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist is a sure fire way to fail a business. Just like E-books. What was the fucking point? There's nothing wrong with traditional books, and E-books added little if any value. I just don't see the fucking point any more. Quit beating a dead horse.
What in the hell is a "heatspreader"?
Do tell. In fact, you have no idea what I do for a living, and your assumptions are laughable from where I am sitting. In fact, "free as in freedom" is directly applicable to the bottom line when you can control the destiny of the software your business depends on. While Microsoft tells you where you are going today, those who control their own software get to make that business decision themselves.
And THAT is what helps you pay your bills.
"control the destiny of the software"? For one thing, I can tell that you don't run any kind of business. This is just laughable. Microsoft doesn't have any say over what software I install on my computer, so your spouting is largely irrelevant. I make software buying decisions based on many economic factors, but "controlling destiny" doesn't generally come into play. Things like initial cost, maintenance, training, support, downtime, possible upgrades, etc are things that I consider when I buy software. "Freedom" is something that people with excess disposable income can slap themselves on the back about. Those of us living in the real world don't have that luxury.
I'm glad that Opera, Mozilla...etc,etc,etc and Apache server kept Microsoft from controlling the HTML standards completely!!
Apache, maybe (although I have no idea what Apache has to do with HTML), but Opera and Mozilla? Are you fucking kidding? With something along the lines of 3% usage, how can you say they've had *anything* to do with influencing standards? That's insane.
No, YOU don't get it. You obviously don't run a business. Principles like "free as in freedom" don't come into play when you're talking about the bottom line. That's a very, very naive viewpoint. I don't give a flying shit about "free as in freedom" when I have bills to pay, and I doubt that most other companies, unless they're awash in profits, do either.
The article says essentially, "Microsoft has competition". It doesn't imply, nor do I believe, that they're in any trouble whatsoever. They're just not able to stomp all over the competition so freely anymore (although, they do still stomp the shit out of Linux in 99% of their markets, I'm sure).
Let's kill all these plugins, and have support for open standards within the browser
/. zealots think. You might as well say, "Let's change the Earth's gravity". Sorry dude, it ain't gonna happen.
Unless your name is "Bill Gates", the chances of
"us" doing this is about zero. The "other" browsers have virtually no impact any more. Game over. Whatever "standards" that a 3rd party came up with are completely irrelevant. I've argued that they've been irrelevant for several years now, in fact. Whatever IE does is the de-facto standard, no matter what the
I hate MS, but hopefully this thing can be beat. (Did I sum up the first 50 posts properly?)
Oh yeah... "What's The Fucking Point?"
All these things are done to help enhance the safety of everyone using the medium.
Right. Safety. Safety in real life. Drive a car or fly a plane badly, and you can kill other people. People don't die via the Net. "Safety" on line is not life or death... it's just a possible annoyance.
I haven't seen $2.10/gallon for gas in a long, long, long time, but even so, is never getting laid, and not enjoying your car worth almost $1K/year? I kinda' doubt that. If I had to drive one of those little tin cans every day, I'd have to spend $50/month on anti-depressants and $500/month on hookers, which would make that car significantly more expensive.
VW's are not gay. An old woman's car they may be, but not a gay man's car. Consider the Mitsubishi Eclipse--it is by far the gayest car, in terms of being desired and driven by homosexual men.
In my area, it's young girls (late teens, early 20's) and gay men. Period. A few old women drive the beetles, but primarily, girls and gay men. In my area, I don't see a lot of gay men driving Eclipses.
I agreee 100%. A few pennies here and there on saved gas isn't worth it to me to buy a car that costs more, looks like shit, doesn't perform, and is expensive to fix. The only people who should buy these cars are tree-huggers.
Check out www.tdiclub.com. I just got a 2000 TDI Beetle and it's awesome
That's a very sexist remark. You're assuming that the poster is also gay. He may very well not be gay, in which case, a VW is out of the question.
I mean, the numbers aren't from Bruce Perens or ESR or RMS, so I don't trust them. Besides, how do we REALLY know this article was put on that web server, by the owners, and it's not just another hacked W2K/IIS box. And besides, the article didn't even mention anything about standard deviations, so the statistics are 100% wrong. Besides, I read the article with IE, so I'm sure that IE manipulated the numbers that I saw. Besides... oh fucking give it up, zealots. Linux isn't as rock solid 100% secure as everybody claims it to be. It's just as hackable as W2K. Crawl back under your rocks, now.
And what are Indians in this country offering that the locals can't supply?