OSX can't take over as long as Apple insists that it only be installed on their hardware. Businesses don't want to be locked into one particular hardware vendor. And while Apple's premium laptops are competitive in terms of price and performance (the 15" rMBP is probably the best on the market), they have basically nothing in the under-$1000 segment. And their desktop offerings are laughably outdated and overpriced junk.
What these critics all miss is that Microsoft is now betting on the tablet market, and doesn't give a damn what its PC users think.
They may not care what home PC users think, but they better care about what enterprise users think because that's where all their money comes from. And enterprise users tend to be even more change-averse than home users.
For Microsoft to give the middle finger to enterprise users is as suicidal as if Google decided to give the middle finger to advertisers.
Windows 8 is probably the most innovative and certainly the boldest thing MS has done in years. Maybe, ever.
You don't get it. Windows users don't want bold change. We want things to keep working the way they have been working, just with additional polishing, bug fixing, and little features here and there. The existing Windows configuration is a standard workflow, and when you mess with that, you're killing productivity.
I don't care for Windows 8 as much as the next guy, but they're not going to reverse field; Microsoft is all in on this.
I'm sure if you had asked Coke executives in May-June 1985, all of them would have said they were "all in" on New Coke. People generally don't attain high-level executive positions by being indecisive or publicly showing doubt. But when customers don't want to buy the product you're selling now, and they want to buy the product you used to sell but don't any more, then it doesn't take a marketing genius to figure out what you should do. And if you don't make that decision on your own, then eventually someone higher up will do it for you. If not the leader of the Windows team, then Ballmer. If not Ballmer, then the Board of Directors. And if not the Board, then ultimately Wall Street.
And if you think they will, look at when Microsoft originally wanted to EOL WinXP, and when they actually did.
Hell, I'm not convinced that MS is even going to EoL XP on the scheduled date in 2014. There are still a lot of big companies (and not a few governments!) stuck on XP, and I think many of them are asking MS how big a dump truck of money they have to drive up to their door to get the expiration date pushed back indefinitely.
The problem is the trend of being cool because you can complain has left .
Can't find the start button? Yes it's damn annoying I agree, but New Coke sucked all around. Windows 8 isn't all about a single button. A keyboard you aren't used to will ruin your life much more miserably, but do you call Dell and tell them the computer should go in the garbage? It's time people got used to this mess. Yes as a hardcore 24 hours a day user it is definitely a mess and why we can't get to the shutdown or log off screen with a click is frustrating. You are not going to sell businesses on this model the way it is right now. But it is not going to make anyone go out and change their life. Let the insane and moaners do whatever makes them feel better. I will donate a leper to your cause.
You don't seem to get it. Microsoft is a business that is attempting to sell a rather expensive (~$100 and up) product to consumers. If you want to sell your product, you have to listen to what your customers want. You can't just brush off their complaints by saying that they will eventually get used to it. Well, you can, but you'll lose a ton of business that way, and shareholders will start to get unhappy.
It may be an exaggeration to say that "the customer is always right" – sometimes individual customers really are unreasonable – but if thousands of customers are telling you the same thing, then you should damn well listen.
The current HDMI revision only supports 4K at frame rates of 30 fps or below, so it's not really suitable for anything except watching film-sourced content. Supposedly HDMI 1.5 might support 4K@60Hz, but this is not confirmed. You need DisplayPort to do it now.
Seiki has a 50" TV with a 3840x2160 resolution, available right now for $1499. So I don't buy the argument that it's somehow technologically prohibitive. Why can this crappy company no one has ever heard of bring out a 4K TV under $1500, but no one else can make a 4K monitor in an even smaller size (32" or so) without charging over $5500? (and that's for Sharp's offering, which is the next least expensive – most 4K monitors cost as much as a new car). As far as I can tell, it's not technological barriers but a desire to segment the market and charge professional and medical users out the ass for 4K displays.
Only they are failing to compete with $20 cards as well, and their best offering is smoked by SOC (sorry, lingo - System On a Chip) like the AMD A10 in the graphics department.
The AMD A10 is not a "SoC" any more than Intel's offerings are. Both AMD and Intel are currently offering CPUs with integrated GPUs – it's just that the marketing is slightly different, and that each company emphasizes its own strength (AMD has better GPUs, Intel has better CPUs).
For these to reasonably be considered a "SoC", the whole northbridge (or whatever they're calling it now) would have to be moved onto the main die. That hasn't happened yet, though Intel is starting to move that way with Haswell.
I thought people involved in educational process are better than this...
The teachers often are. The administrators, no. Most teachers care about the kids, while the administrators tend to be risk-averse bureaucrats who find it easier to hide behind a rule book than to make tough decisions.
Computers are filled with flash memory: bios, network card firmware, HDD firmware, GPU card firmware, etc. Booting from clean media and formatting the HDD platters may not remove the virus. Any firmware can re-install itself to the diskdrive, either during or after the formatting or windows install.
Most of these infection vectors are merely theoretical at this point. Sure, there may have been proofs-of-concept, but not much in the wild. After all, a firmware-targeting worm would probably only work with one particular kind of chipset, while a worm that exploits one of the ten thousand vulnerabilities in Flash or Java can infect almost any Windows box. Malware writers these days are in it for the $$$, not the lulz; they want the biggest ROI.
Anyway, the article (and summary) specifically states it was Conficker. That's just a Windows worm, and re-imaging the affected systems would fix it, no problem. If they need to recover data, then first boot from a LiveCD into a different OS and copy the required files to a flash drive or network share.
There's an old legal saying that if the facts are against you, you should hammer the law; if the law is against you, you should hammer the facts; and if both are against you, you should hammer on the table. Since this guy doesn't cite any particular laws or facts to defend his position, he's apparently resorting to hammering on the table.
Aside from ideological reasons, why would anyone choose btrfs over ZFS? The latter seems to be superior from both a theoretical and practical standpoint, and has more real-world stability testing. This is especially true if you're not specifically wedded to Linux and are willing to use FreeBSD or a derivative for your file hosting server(s).
Good point here, I wonder when they'll start shipping video card with external power supplies...
In their last days, 3DFX actually had a product which was going to do this, the Voodoo5 6000 with a "Voodoo Volts" external power supply. This 4-GPU card was never released because the company went broke first.
I did a Google search and it appears that the AMD open-source video drivers are only available for Linux and for an obscure "embedded" version of Windows. Is there a version for standard Windows 7 that I'm overlooking?
nVidia's drivers have gone downhill of late and they're still better than AMD's.
Does anyone other than Intel actually have stable graphics card drivers? Is there a way to get drivers from AMD or nVidia which turn off the hackish "optimizations" and accept slightly lower FPS in exchange for more stability?
Steven Sinofsky, architect of Windows 8, was already fired. (Officially, he was supposed to have resigned of his own free will, but no one believes that.) And it's now being reported that Windows 8.1 will bring back the Start button and include the ability to boot straight to desktop. They're too embarrassed to backpedal all at once, but in the long run, Metro will go the way of Active Desktop.
So here's the question, Slashdotters: Is Windows really doomed? And, if not, what can be done to turn things around? (No originality points awarded for a 'Fire Steve Ballmer' response.)"
Just because "fire Steve Ballmer" isn't a particularly original insight doesn't mean it is not correct. He's been a lousy CEO, and the manner in which he has jeopardized the company's vital enterprise business in a fit of Apple envy proves that he's the wrong man for the job.
A large number of home users with modest IT needs (web surfing, social networking, simple games) have already switched to iOS and Android for most of their computing needs. That horse has left the barn; that ship has sailed. These users are not coming back to Windows. And the truth is that Microsoft can survive without them. What Microsoft cannot survive is the loss of business users. This is where the bulk of their revenue comes from, and it's also the least threatened area of their business. Legacy lock-in, the fact that most people are already trained on Windows/Office, and the interdependence between various MS enterprise products (Windows, Office, Exchange, SharePoint, MS SQL Server, etc.) means that businesses will find it difficult and expensive to leave the Windows platform. And most of them don't really want to, since it serves their needs where a smartphone/tablet OS would not. This is why Windows 8 was such a strategic blunder. Microsoft alienated the people whose support it needs in a failed attempt to reclaim low-margin, low-volume customers who already left.
Microsoft needs to accept that it's a mature company now and that it isn't going to post stunningly high profits or make major innovations on the OS front. It should focus on incremental improvements to the Windows platform. If they bring back the Start menu and the option to boot directly to the Desktop in Win8.1 as has been rumored, it will help mitigate the damage.
Companies in general ought to focus on their core competencies, and under Steve Ballmer, this basic rule of business has been forgotten at Microsoft.
This writer makes a fundamental mistake: believing that if full driverless technology is not perfect or at least near-perfect, it is therefore unacceptable. But this is not true. Driverless technology becomes workable when it is better than the average human driver. That's a pretty low bar to clear. I know all of us think we're above-average drivers, but there are a lot of really bad drivers out there, and even a flawed automatic system could do a better job.
Because if Microsoft sees this as an Enterprise-only issue, they may restore the old interface to *only* Enterprise copies of Win8. And yes, this could be done, relatively simply, by making the feature hinge on the node belonging to an Active Directory domain.
This seems unlikely, and there isn't really any precedent for it. Even XP Mode in Windows 7, which was definitely an enterprise-focused feature, was supported on Windows 7 Professional whether or not it was a VLK version or whether it was on a domain. What I can see is the start menu and direct-to-desktop boot being limited to Professional, and omitted from Home. Also, it's likely it would require using a registry key or gpedit.msc to configure, rather than being in the standard Control Panel. That said, I suspect some OEMs would enable this by default unless Microsoft bribes them not to.
I know that we Slashdotters would love to believe there is a Windows exodus because of Windows 8. But in reality, that will never happen. Are you saying that Grandma or Joe Blow, as pissed off as they are with the Win8 UI, are going to switch to Linux?
Grandma and Joe Blow haven't updated their computers since 2006, and don't plan to do so any time in the near future. Those computers mostly still run XP, and sit in the corner unused most of the time. Grandma and Joe Blow now do most of their web browsing/Facebook/whatever on a smartphone or iPad.
Microsoft had hoped that Windows 8 would bring Grandma and Joe Blow back into the fold, luring them away from iOS and Android. They realized that businesses and power users might not be too thrilled at the change, but as Adam Orth put it, they'd just have to "deal with it." Or so Microsoft thought. But they overestimated their market power and the desirability of their brands. The predicted new converts failed to materialize, while their existing user base hated Windows 8. In attempting to gain back lost marketshare, they risked losing the market they already had sewn up: businesses and power users. I suspect that feedback from large organizations was responsible for Microsoft's decision to backpedal here. Most likely the Fortune 500s flat out told MS that if they were going to have to pay for all that retraining, it wouldn't be retraining for Windows 8, but for some other OS.
Bandwidth and CPU power. It takes a lot more of those to send a compressed image over the wire than it does to send the instructions to build an image.
That would be true if modern applications still used X11 graphics primitives. But they don't. It's not 1985 any more; 8x8 bitmap fonts and non-anti-aliased Bresenham lines don't cut it these days. And those are the kinds of graphics primitives X11 supports. As a result, modern UIs generally use a third-party library such as cairo for everything, then the bitmap result gets sent over the wire when remoting with X11. In other words, it's no better than what you'd get with RDP, and if RDP supports primitives that people will actually use, then the latter will actually be superior.
Even if servers can dish out content at 2 Gbps (and many of them can't), almost all modern NICs max out at Gigabit Ethernet support. Although a 10 Gbps Ethernet standard has existed for a couple years, the cabling and termination requirements are extremely tight (most existing Cat5 and even Cat6 installations won't qualify) and the network cards cost hundreds of dollars while switches cost thousands.
I think this service would be most useful to small businesses, which could easily support both their internal networks and good-quality customer-facing WiFi on one connection. (Larger businesses are going to want redundancy and SLAs which this consumer-level product doesn't offer.)
Should you have a right to use a radio on my property?
Yes, for the same reason that airplanes have a right to fly over your property. The bundle of property rights you purchased with your land/house/business don't include the airspace far above the house, nor does it include the right to do anything you want with the RF spectrum within its boundaries. (Of course you can use passive construction techniques that have the effect of screening out certain frequencies, just not active jamming.)
That's precisely the point – there is no "natural" state of what things "should" be, since the entire structure of the "free market" is itself the product of government intervention. (Multinational corporations are a direct creation of government, they sure as hell don't exist in a state of nature. Same with IP laws. And in a state of nature, you only control as much property as you and your friends/family can defend with armed force.) So the question then becomes: why should we structure the market to benefit billionaires like Zuckerberg instead of ordinary working programmers?
Slashdot Mirror
OSX can't take over as long as Apple insists that it only be installed on their hardware. Businesses don't want to be locked into one particular hardware vendor. And while Apple's premium laptops are competitive in terms of price and performance (the 15" rMBP is probably the best on the market), they have basically nothing in the under-$1000 segment. And their desktop offerings are laughably outdated and overpriced junk.
What these critics all miss is that Microsoft is now betting on the tablet market, and doesn't give a damn what its PC users think.
They may not care what home PC users think, but they better care about what enterprise users think because that's where all their money comes from. And enterprise users tend to be even more change-averse than home users.
For Microsoft to give the middle finger to enterprise users is as suicidal as if Google decided to give the middle finger to advertisers.
Windows 8 is probably the most innovative and certainly the boldest thing MS has done in years. Maybe, ever.
You don't get it. Windows users don't want bold change. We want things to keep working the way they have been working, just with additional polishing, bug fixing, and little features here and there. The existing Windows configuration is a standard workflow, and when you mess with that, you're killing productivity.
I don't care for Windows 8 as much as the next guy, but they're not going to reverse field; Microsoft is all in on this.
I'm sure if you had asked Coke executives in May-June 1985, all of them would have said they were "all in" on New Coke. People generally don't attain high-level executive positions by being indecisive or publicly showing doubt. But when customers don't want to buy the product you're selling now, and they want to buy the product you used to sell but don't any more, then it doesn't take a marketing genius to figure out what you should do. And if you don't make that decision on your own, then eventually someone higher up will do it for you. If not the leader of the Windows team, then Ballmer. If not Ballmer, then the Board of Directors. And if not the Board, then ultimately Wall Street.
And if you think they will, look at when Microsoft originally wanted to EOL WinXP, and when they actually did.
Hell, I'm not convinced that MS is even going to EoL XP on the scheduled date in 2014. There are still a lot of big companies (and not a few governments!) stuck on XP, and I think many of them are asking MS how big a dump truck of money they have to drive up to their door to get the expiration date pushed back indefinitely.
The problem is the trend of being cool because you can complain has left . Can't find the start button? Yes it's damn annoying I agree, but New Coke sucked all around. Windows 8 isn't all about a single button. A keyboard you aren't used to will ruin your life much more miserably, but do you call Dell and tell them the computer should go in the garbage? It's time people got used to this mess. Yes as a hardcore 24 hours a day user it is definitely a mess and why we can't get to the shutdown or log off screen with a click is frustrating. You are not going to sell businesses on this model the way it is right now. But it is not going to make anyone go out and change their life. Let the insane and moaners do whatever makes them feel better. I will donate a leper to your cause.
You don't seem to get it. Microsoft is a business that is attempting to sell a rather expensive (~$100 and up) product to consumers. If you want to sell your product, you have to listen to what your customers want. You can't just brush off their complaints by saying that they will eventually get used to it. Well, you can, but you'll lose a ton of business that way, and shareholders will start to get unhappy.
It may be an exaggeration to say that "the customer is always right" – sometimes individual customers really are unreasonable – but if thousands of customers are telling you the same thing, then you should damn well listen.
Know what else supports 4K? HDMI.
The current HDMI revision only supports 4K at frame rates of 30 fps or below, so it's not really suitable for anything except watching film-sourced content. Supposedly HDMI 1.5 might support 4K@60Hz, but this is not confirmed. You need DisplayPort to do it now.
Seiki has a 50" TV with a 3840x2160 resolution, available right now for $1499. So I don't buy the argument that it's somehow technologically prohibitive. Why can this crappy company no one has ever heard of bring out a 4K TV under $1500, but no one else can make a 4K monitor in an even smaller size (32" or so) without charging over $5500? (and that's for Sharp's offering, which is the next least expensive – most 4K monitors cost as much as a new car). As far as I can tell, it's not technological barriers but a desire to segment the market and charge professional and medical users out the ass for 4K displays.
Only they are failing to compete with $20 cards as well, and their best offering is smoked by SOC (sorry, lingo - System On a Chip) like the AMD A10 in the graphics department.
The AMD A10 is not a "SoC" any more than Intel's offerings are. Both AMD and Intel are currently offering CPUs with integrated GPUs – it's just that the marketing is slightly different, and that each company emphasizes its own strength (AMD has better GPUs, Intel has better CPUs).
For these to reasonably be considered a "SoC", the whole northbridge (or whatever they're calling it now) would have to be moved onto the main die. That hasn't happened yet, though Intel is starting to move that way with Haswell.
I thought people involved in educational process are better than this...
The teachers often are. The administrators, no. Most teachers care about the kids, while the administrators tend to be risk-averse bureaucrats who find it easier to hide behind a rule book than to make tough decisions.
Computers are filled with flash memory: bios, network card firmware, HDD firmware, GPU card firmware, etc. Booting from clean media and formatting the HDD platters may not remove the virus. Any firmware can re-install itself to the diskdrive, either during or after the formatting or windows install.
Most of these infection vectors are merely theoretical at this point. Sure, there may have been proofs-of-concept, but not much in the wild. After all, a firmware-targeting worm would probably only work with one particular kind of chipset, while a worm that exploits one of the ten thousand vulnerabilities in Flash or Java can infect almost any Windows box. Malware writers these days are in it for the $$$, not the lulz; they want the biggest ROI.
Anyway, the article (and summary) specifically states it was Conficker. That's just a Windows worm, and re-imaging the affected systems would fix it, no problem. If they need to recover data, then first boot from a LiveCD into a different OS and copy the required files to a flash drive or network share.
There's an old legal saying that if the facts are against you, you should hammer the law; if the law is against you, you should hammer the facts; and if both are against you, you should hammer on the table. Since this guy doesn't cite any particular laws or facts to defend his position, he's apparently resorting to hammering on the table.
Aside from ideological reasons, why would anyone choose btrfs over ZFS? The latter seems to be superior from both a theoretical and practical standpoint, and has more real-world stability testing. This is especially true if you're not specifically wedded to Linux and are willing to use FreeBSD or a derivative for your file hosting server(s).
Good point here, I wonder when they'll start shipping video card with external power supplies...
In their last days, 3DFX actually had a product which was going to do this, the Voodoo5 6000 with a "Voodoo Volts" external power supply. This 4-GPU card was never released because the company went broke first.
I did a Google search and it appears that the AMD open-source video drivers are only available for Linux and for an obscure "embedded" version of Windows. Is there a version for standard Windows 7 that I'm overlooking?
nVidia's drivers have gone downhill of late and they're still better than AMD's.
Does anyone other than Intel actually have stable graphics card drivers? Is there a way to get drivers from AMD or nVidia which turn off the hackish "optimizations" and accept slightly lower FPS in exchange for more stability?
Steven Sinofsky, architect of Windows 8, was already fired. (Officially, he was supposed to have resigned of his own free will, but no one believes that.) And it's now being reported that Windows 8.1 will bring back the Start button and include the ability to boot straight to desktop. They're too embarrassed to backpedal all at once, but in the long run, Metro will go the way of Active Desktop.
So here's the question, Slashdotters: Is Windows really doomed? And, if not, what can be done to turn things around? (No originality points awarded for a 'Fire Steve Ballmer' response.)"
Just because "fire Steve Ballmer" isn't a particularly original insight doesn't mean it is not correct. He's been a lousy CEO, and the manner in which he has jeopardized the company's vital enterprise business in a fit of Apple envy proves that he's the wrong man for the job.
A large number of home users with modest IT needs (web surfing, social networking, simple games) have already switched to iOS and Android for most of their computing needs. That horse has left the barn; that ship has sailed. These users are not coming back to Windows. And the truth is that Microsoft can survive without them. What Microsoft cannot survive is the loss of business users. This is where the bulk of their revenue comes from, and it's also the least threatened area of their business. Legacy lock-in, the fact that most people are already trained on Windows/Office, and the interdependence between various MS enterprise products (Windows, Office, Exchange, SharePoint, MS SQL Server, etc.) means that businesses will find it difficult and expensive to leave the Windows platform. And most of them don't really want to, since it serves their needs where a smartphone/tablet OS would not. This is why Windows 8 was such a strategic blunder. Microsoft alienated the people whose support it needs in a failed attempt to reclaim low-margin, low-volume customers who already left.
Microsoft needs to accept that it's a mature company now and that it isn't going to post stunningly high profits or make major innovations on the OS front. It should focus on incremental improvements to the Windows platform. If they bring back the Start menu and the option to boot directly to the Desktop in Win8.1 as has been rumored, it will help mitigate the damage.
Companies in general ought to focus on their core competencies, and under Steve Ballmer, this basic rule of business has been forgotten at Microsoft.
This writer makes a fundamental mistake: believing that if full driverless technology is not perfect or at least near-perfect, it is therefore unacceptable. But this is not true. Driverless technology becomes workable when it is better than the average human driver. That's a pretty low bar to clear. I know all of us think we're above-average drivers, but there are a lot of really bad drivers out there, and even a flawed automatic system could do a better job.
Because if Microsoft sees this as an Enterprise-only issue, they may restore the old interface to *only* Enterprise copies of Win8. And yes, this could be done, relatively simply, by making the feature hinge on the node belonging to an Active Directory domain.
This seems unlikely, and there isn't really any precedent for it. Even XP Mode in Windows 7, which was definitely an enterprise-focused feature, was supported on Windows 7 Professional whether or not it was a VLK version or whether it was on a domain. What I can see is the start menu and direct-to-desktop boot being limited to Professional, and omitted from Home. Also, it's likely it would require using a registry key or gpedit.msc to configure, rather than being in the standard Control Panel. That said, I suspect some OEMs would enable this by default unless Microsoft bribes them not to.
I know that we Slashdotters would love to believe there is a Windows exodus because of Windows 8. But in reality, that will never happen. Are you saying that Grandma or Joe Blow, as pissed off as they are with the Win8 UI, are going to switch to Linux?
Grandma and Joe Blow haven't updated their computers since 2006, and don't plan to do so any time in the near future. Those computers mostly still run XP, and sit in the corner unused most of the time. Grandma and Joe Blow now do most of their web browsing/Facebook/whatever on a smartphone or iPad.
Microsoft had hoped that Windows 8 would bring Grandma and Joe Blow back into the fold, luring them away from iOS and Android. They realized that businesses and power users might not be too thrilled at the change, but as Adam Orth put it, they'd just have to "deal with it." Or so Microsoft thought. But they overestimated their market power and the desirability of their brands. The predicted new converts failed to materialize, while their existing user base hated Windows 8. In attempting to gain back lost marketshare, they risked losing the market they already had sewn up: businesses and power users. I suspect that feedback from large organizations was responsible for Microsoft's decision to backpedal here. Most likely the Fortune 500s flat out told MS that if they were going to have to pay for all that retraining, it wouldn't be retraining for Windows 8, but for some other OS.
Bandwidth and CPU power. It takes a lot more of those to send a compressed image over the wire than it does to send the instructions to build an image.
That would be true if modern applications still used X11 graphics primitives. But they don't. It's not 1985 any more; 8x8 bitmap fonts and non-anti-aliased Bresenham lines don't cut it these days. And those are the kinds of graphics primitives X11 supports. As a result, modern UIs generally use a third-party library such as cairo for everything, then the bitmap result gets sent over the wire when remoting with X11. In other words, it's no better than what you'd get with RDP, and if RDP supports primitives that people will actually use, then the latter will actually be superior.
Even if servers can dish out content at 2 Gbps (and many of them can't), almost all modern NICs max out at Gigabit Ethernet support. Although a 10 Gbps Ethernet standard has existed for a couple years, the cabling and termination requirements are extremely tight (most existing Cat5 and even Cat6 installations won't qualify) and the network cards cost hundreds of dollars while switches cost thousands.
I think this service would be most useful to small businesses, which could easily support both their internal networks and good-quality customer-facing WiFi on one connection. (Larger businesses are going to want redundancy and SLAs which this consumer-level product doesn't offer.)
Should you have a right to use a radio on my property?
Yes, for the same reason that airplanes have a right to fly over your property. The bundle of property rights you purchased with your land/house/business don't include the airspace far above the house, nor does it include the right to do anything you want with the RF spectrum within its boundaries. (Of course you can use passive construction techniques that have the effect of screening out certain frequencies, just not active jamming.)
That's precisely the point – there is no "natural" state of what things "should" be, since the entire structure of the "free market" is itself the product of government intervention. (Multinational corporations are a direct creation of government, they sure as hell don't exist in a state of nature. Same with IP laws. And in a state of nature, you only control as much property as you and your friends/family can defend with armed force.) So the question then becomes: why should we structure the market to benefit billionaires like Zuckerberg instead of ordinary working programmers?