First of all, isn't one of the main benefits of XML is that everything is supposed to be able to use it? The beauty of XML is that it only specifies how data can be stored in an open form that any platform can use. If they twisted it the point where other XML supporting software can't to theirs, then they aren't really using XML, are they?
They may have a server out now that supports XML that may become very popular, it doesn't mean that they are going to take the market on XML. As usually happens, their software is late to market. As far as anyone knows, it is not mature may be still full of bugs. Other companies (including, but not limited to Sun) have had products and APIs out on the market for quite awhile and have had a chance to mature.
Also, take a look at the price. $5,000 for the standard version and $25,000 for the enterprise version. A few small companies may pay those prices. But large companies won't want to get burned on slow unreliable MS products and will go with a a different solution.
I would be really suprised if Big Brother sits by and lets this project go through. It seems that there are many countries that would not allow this type of technology to be used within their boundaries.
Although what they are doing does sound pretty interesting, it's all been done before (i.e. Java). They are still trying to make up for the bad call they made about the Internet a few years back.
The only reason it might succeed, is because they already have a large number of developers depedent on their software (i.e. lemmings). If Microsoft changes direction, they will have to follow.
Java has too much of a head start, about 5 years (I think), which has given it time to mature. MS can't bring a product to maturity that fast, take a look at Windows for instance.
This could be good for Napster. If eBay is not liable for the what their users are doing, why should it be any different for Napster? Seems like the same situation to me.
All in all, this looks like an important ruling concerning any service hosting "trading" activities for it's users.
I'm just wondering if there is a better way we could go about electing a president. It's awfully unsettling to me that how the country is going to be led for the next 4 yrs based on this vote, considering all of the things that are going on.
Is this the proper attitude: "Oops, we don't know who has a majority yet so let's do a recount, may be there will be a difference." That combined with the fact the Gore has a clear popular advantage (albeit a slim one). At least in congress important decisions have to be won by a 2/3s majority.
Also, the fact that this all has to be basically done on one day (minus absentee and military). It makes the process awfully rushed, which makes it awfully sloppy. If it was spread out over a period of a few weeks could we avoid problems such as missing ballot boxes and voter fraud.
I like my job. I like getting paid even more. Do you know why I have a job? It's because my compay produces a product that is useful and unique. It took a considerable amount of resources to develop.
Why shouldn't we be allowed to protect our investment?
Slashdot Mirror
They may have a server out now that supports XML that may become very popular, it doesn't mean that they are going to take the market on XML. As usually happens, their software is late to market. As far as anyone knows, it is not mature may be still full of bugs. Other companies (including, but not limited to Sun) have had products and APIs out on the market for quite awhile and have had a chance to mature.
Also, take a look at the price. $5,000 for the standard version and $25,000 for the enterprise version. A few small companies may pay those prices. But large companies won't want to get burned on slow unreliable MS products and will go with a a different solution.
Anyway... just my $.02 rant.
I would be really suprised if Big Brother sits by and lets this project go through. It seems that there are many countries that would not allow this type of technology to be used within their boundaries.
Well heck, it compiles... lets ship it.
The only reason it might succeed, is because they already have a large number of developers depedent on their software (i.e. lemmings). If Microsoft changes direction, they will have to follow.
Java has too much of a head start, about 5 years (I think), which has given it time to mature. MS can't bring a product to maturity that fast, take a look at Windows for instance.
All in all, this looks like an important ruling concerning any service hosting "trading" activities for it's users.
Is this the proper attitude: "Oops, we don't know who has a majority yet so let's do a recount, may be there will be a difference." That combined with the fact the Gore has a clear popular advantage (albeit a slim one). At least in congress important decisions have to be won by a 2/3s majority.
Also, the fact that this all has to be basically done on one day (minus absentee and military). It makes the process awfully rushed, which makes it awfully sloppy. If it was spread out over a period of a few weeks could we avoid problems such as missing ballot boxes and voter fraud.
Just my $.02, (Heck, maybe that is a whole $.03)
Who submitted this story?
I like my job. I like getting paid even more. Do you know why I have a job? It's because my compay produces a product that is useful and unique. It took a considerable amount of resources to develop. Why shouldn't we be allowed to protect our investment?