the egregious idea of keeping the Source Code of a program secret from its own users
As long as your biggest market is people who want it done for them, and as long as it's affordable, the OS will continue to drop into their hands. The price increase for the various iterations of Vista show that Microsoft is at least aware of Windows' continuing strength.
If you want OSS to blossom, it has got to become sexy and work with much less nerd/geek presence. Symbian happens to power smart phones, but it's not sexy either. It can't spoil you in that "mainstream-moves-the-most-water" way, like Windows can.
It has come to our attention that your website, [sh*touttaluck.com], does not meet compliance in terms of a variety of copyright laws of the United States and other countries. Infractions indicated by our software include, but are not limited to:
Images created with an unregistered copy of Adobe Photoshop Flash files created with an unregistered copy of Macromedia Studio MX 2004 PDFs created with an unregistered copy of Adobe Acrobat Professional Content and structure created with an unregistered copy of Macromedia Studio MX 2004 Content and structure created with an unregistered copy of Microsoft Office Frontpage 2003 Images created with an unregistered copy of . . . "
...starting to see what I'm going with? I understand they're likely talking about copyrighted content such as prior art images or mp3 files, or maybe even damaging company secrets that are leaked by a whistleblower, and then redistributed for the intent of airing dirty laundry, but I'm thinking about the structure of a page itself. A person group or company who solicits a webpage to be created by a web design studio would now have to ensure that the studio itself is in compliance, or the products they use to create the pages are legal. That's where I get all nervous.
Ironically, I was in Maryland yesterday afternoon. The only glitch I had was reprogramming the card to pre-set one candidate's vote total to a negative number... but I un-checked the "read only" box and it worked fine.
You have opportunities in the short timeframe presented by the interaction with the customer. In those moments, there are a variety of things to consider:
(1) Their perception is completely based on their inability to properly understand how the system works... or worse, they don't want to know. If what they feel is stirred by their ignorance, you can't beat that until you demonstrate (with a LOT of patience) that it does work.
This technique is more valuable than most people consider, because when you work with the customer as directly as possible (or explain as simply as you can what the readouts of the Task Manager Processes window actually represents), it actually helps to create the relationship that businesses really want with service providers.
(2) Another thing guiding their perception is spawned by the possibility that other systems may interfere with your systems. Your benchmarks and your test environment are not the same as theirs in production... what you see as a working, functioning model does not mean the outcome will be the same where they are.
Easiest example is like a network throughput test. You may see 100mbit full duplex, but they may work in a hubbed environment with a jabbering NIC somewhere on the network. Or a quiet network such as yours may not make multiple requests to the machine in question, but when they put it back online, it may be getting DoSsed out the yang.
(3) Last thing is to demonstrate the importance of your SLA, and what it does not cover. You must be firm about this, and explain that while your benchmarks indicate proper function, for a reasonable fee you can watch over their shoulder after it's reimplemented.
This becomes a cost/benefit exercise, but in one fell swoop, if you have the opportunity to visit his site, you might charge an hour's service wage to investigate on your own. Most often when I'm having to look at the impossible possibility, I have to open my mind as wide as possible, and consider as many variables as I reasonably can.
Keep your perspective as wide as possible. People don't always intend to insist things are your fault, but you better be aware of the fact that this customer will not be the first to bitch. If you succeed at solving the problem, you have both satisfied the customer, and demonstrated your ability to agreeably end hostile customer problems.
First off, do not underestimate the stupidity of the American consumer. If it is attractive AND comes with a key set of added values ("check it out, mom! A lamp (barstool/toothbrush caddy/picture of the mother-in-law) that will play Quake? COOOL!!"), it is as good as purchased.
Second, remember that the intent is to encourage shell designers to improve the way PC's look, which is not a bad idea at all. They do seem artificially boxy at times, or they have too many tres geek nuances (Gateway, one of the shoddiest PCs on the planet, looks like it came right off the deck of the Enterprise). The only people who cared about case modding were the gamers anyway... until someone actually creates the ottoman PC which perfectly balances the zen in the room.
What works in the fashion marketplace will eventually make it back to the office anyway, even though the sysadmin still won't give a shit if he's given a choice between aubergine and tangelo.
I see it as a positive, but it's probably going to be as in false positive, or an "oh shit... you're pregnant?!" positive.
Slashdot is all about understanding through reading and learning as we go. Today alone we've read about WGA, WPA, WiFi, OSS, VA, NH, AMD, FFXII, RIAA, GPS, WLAN, GSM, RC3, MMORPG, and P2P.
The FBI will be along shortly to raid your offices on suspicion of violating the DMCA, the Patriot Act, and probably some other bullshit piece of legislation we don't even know about.
Have you ever searched for a historical interpretation of the philosophy of Muhammad? Have you ever posted a derisive comment about George Bush on a forum? Have you ever had interrogators knock on your door at 2 in the morning?
Mind you, even though IE has been riddled with security issues from the very beginning, IE set up a unique precedent in providing a cheap window to the web. Effectively, Microsoft was able to show the world that one's limitations for computing might require only the browser itself. Don't forget that IE's contribution (free browser for expensive PCs) may have pushed the idea forward that the browser could eventually replace an entire PC, such as a thin client.
According to this article, and specifically this page of it, the student you wrote about can't discuss the case at all, or the settlement.
Citing a "time management issue", he literally had to agree to disagree, but now can't discuss it at all. My guess is to discourage others from succeeding as he has done.
Col. Lawrence B. Wilkerson beta tests graphics cards now for nVidia, between gigs as consultant on Fox. His opinion on triangles and rasters is highly respected, so step off the man while he weighs in on a little off-topic speeching between reboots.
Slashdot Mirror
the egregious idea of keeping the Source Code of a program secret from its own users
As long as your biggest market is people who want it done for them, and as long as it's affordable, the OS will continue to drop into their hands. The price increase for the various iterations of Vista show that Microsoft is at least aware of Windows' continuing strength.
If you want OSS to blossom, it has got to become sexy and work with much less nerd/geek presence. Symbian happens to power smart phones, but it's not sexy either. It can't spoil you in that "mainstream-moves-the-most-water" way, like Windows can.
When did my FU become a SO? I must have missed a memo.
And 100% of my IE7 uninstalls were intentional.
I'm bothered by this type of scenario:
"Dear [webmaster]:
It has come to our attention that your website, [sh*touttaluck.com], does not meet compliance in terms of a variety of copyright laws of the United States and other countries. Infractions indicated by our software include, but are not limited to:
Images created with an unregistered copy of Adobe Photoshop
Flash files created with an unregistered copy of Macromedia Studio MX 2004
PDFs created with an unregistered copy of Adobe Acrobat Professional
Content and structure created with an unregistered copy of Macromedia Studio MX 2004
Content and structure created with an unregistered copy of Microsoft Office Frontpage 2003
Images created with an unregistered copy of . . . "
...starting to see what I'm going with? I understand they're likely talking about copyrighted content such as prior art images or mp3 files, or maybe even damaging company secrets that are leaked by a whistleblower, and then redistributed for the intent of airing dirty laundry, but I'm thinking about the structure of a page itself. A person group or company who solicits a webpage to be created by a web design studio would now have to ensure that the studio itself is in compliance, or the products they use to create the pages are legal. That's where I get all nervous.
Ironically, I was in Maryland yesterday afternoon. The only glitch I had was reprogramming the card to pre-set one candidate's vote total to a negative number... but I un-checked the "read only" box and it worked fine.
Go to work for Microsoft, then leave when Google re-extends their offer. Watch out for chairs as you leave.
(1) Their perception is completely based on their inability to properly understand how the system works... or worse, they don't want to know. If what they feel is stirred by their ignorance, you can't beat that until you demonstrate (with a LOT of patience) that it does work.
This technique is more valuable than most people consider, because when you work with the customer as directly as possible (or explain as simply as you can what the readouts of the Task Manager Processes window actually represents), it actually helps to create the relationship that businesses really want with service providers.
(2) Another thing guiding their perception is spawned by the possibility that other systems may interfere with your systems. Your benchmarks and your test environment are not the same as theirs in production... what you see as a working, functioning model does not mean the outcome will be the same where they are.
Easiest example is like a network throughput test. You may see 100mbit full duplex, but they may work in a hubbed environment with a jabbering NIC somewhere on the network. Or a quiet network such as yours may not make multiple requests to the machine in question, but when they put it back online, it may be getting DoSsed out the yang.
(3) Last thing is to demonstrate the importance of your SLA, and what it does not cover. You must be firm about this, and explain that while your benchmarks indicate proper function, for a reasonable fee you can watch over their shoulder after it's reimplemented.
This becomes a cost/benefit exercise, but in one fell swoop, if you have the opportunity to visit his site, you might charge an hour's service wage to investigate on your own. Most often when I'm having to look at the impossible possibility, I have to open my mind as wide as possible, and consider as many variables as I reasonably can.
Keep your perspective as wide as possible. People don't always intend to insist things are your fault, but you better be aware of the fact that this customer will not be the first to bitch. If you succeed at solving the problem, you have both satisfied the customer, and demonstrated your ability to agreeably end hostile customer problems.
Second, remember that the intent is to encourage shell designers to improve the way PC's look, which is not a bad idea at all. They do seem artificially boxy at times, or they have too many tres geek nuances (Gateway, one of the shoddiest PCs on the planet, looks like it came right off the deck of the Enterprise). The only people who cared about case modding were the gamers anyway... until someone actually creates the ottoman PC which perfectly balances the zen in the room.
What works in the fashion marketplace will eventually make it back to the office anyway, even though the sysadmin still won't give a shit if he's given a choice between aubergine and tangelo.
I see it as a positive, but it's probably going to be as in false positive, or an "oh shit... you're pregnant?!" positive.
Well, you can run it... until the activation runs out. Then you can turn it on from time to time, to tweak the BIOS, if necessary.
Sounds like you need to RTFA and STFU.
Because it's not just checking your OS... there's a lot of other software that Microsoft makes.
/. doesn't host with AT&T, so no worries.
Have you ever posted a derisive comment about George Bush on a forum?
Have you ever had interrogators knock on your door at 2 in the morning?
You Will.
And the company that will bring it to you?
AT&T
That sounds like the same scam as the office worker who places an order with Quill, then refuses to share the cookies that come in with the order...
and Harry Browne, too! Don't forget Harry Browne.
Well, wait...
Or, rather, how important my whuffie is.
I betcha Chuck Norris probably has excellent whuffie by now.
Come on, folks! Raise my whuffie!
Since the release of the Word 0-day exploit, I'd rather that .docs open sloooow!
Mind you, even though IE has been riddled with security issues from the very beginning, IE set up a unique precedent in providing a cheap window to the web. Effectively, Microsoft was able to show the world that one's limitations for computing might require only the browser itself. Don't forget that IE's contribution (free browser for expensive PCs) may have pushed the idea forward that the browser could eventually replace an entire PC, such as a thin client.
cut Billy some slack. It's hard to accept anything Leela says about foresight, with that one eye...
Citing a "time management issue", he literally had to agree to disagree, but now can't discuss it at all. My guess is to discourage others from succeeding as he has done.
To you, maybe... but for those who aren't familiar with the format, they're surreptitio.us
I haven't had any trouble with my mousewheel in Firefox; it seems to work perfectly on their site.
Col. Lawrence B. Wilkerson beta tests graphics cards now for nVidia, between gigs as consultant on Fox. His opinion on triangles and rasters is highly respected, so step off the man while he weighs in on a little off-topic speeching between reboots.
Oh wait, that trick doesn't work anymore, so what's he whining about?
FTA: "The telecom companies said that since they are spending billions of dollars to build new fiber-optic networks that can carry more data"
Hey, in a few years, that's more dark fiber for Google to snap up.