I guess my browsing wasn't as thorough as yours, because I checked and double-checked and was surprised to see that nobody had mentioned it. And my post made no mention nor allusions to one school being better than the other - just more commonly known.
Not that it really changes the point of the story, but the post is slightly misleading. It was a UMass Dartmouth student - a school in Massachusetts. When most people hear Dartmouth alone, they think of the school in New Hampshire.
Here's my take: He did it as a joke. He thought it was inconsequential. He wasn't trying to construct some elaborate consipiracy to implicate the other guy for the assassination. He was basically doing the equivalent of changing the screensaver on computers at Best Buy to say "SpideyCT is cool". It is funny to be able to do something so simple, and because it reaches such a large audience, looks like you did something special. So yeah, he could have covered his tracks better, but I bet it never occurred to him to try. Why would it? In fact, if he had tried to cover it up more, it would have looked like he was trying to cover it up, suggesting that he thought he was doing something he could get in trouble for.
They're using a Creative Commons license. They're creating an RSS extension, instead of coming up with an entirely new format. They worked with the RSS community to get feedback and fine tune. They're following the processes as defined for open source software. Are those processes and licenses so fragile and irrelevant/impotent that they can be co-opted/corrupted so easily? If so, should any business in their right mind use any software based on such licenses?
MS: "I like oranges" You: "I think what you really mean was.. you don't like oranges!" bwahahaha, high five guys! Slashdot: Burn! Man, that was insightful! High five!
You don't have to wait, it is already published. Instead of just spouting off, go read the spec and judge it on its technical merits, instead of adding another needless me too "MS sucks so this must suck" post.
Nintendo has released their classic NES games on their latest handheld devices. I think that means the old "obsolete" stuff is still making money for them.
A chair is not necessary to use the computer to play games. I would never expect Dell to deliver a chair to me when I purchase a complete computer system. A case, ok, you could probably get by without it. You would at least need to buy some sort of switch to connect to the motherboard to turn it on.
A mouse, monitor, and keyboard are necessary for any game I would want to play. I could maybe get by without speakers.
The argument that it is assumed that some peripherals are already owned is completely lame. If that were the case, why include a DVD-ROM drive? Heck, why include a motherboard and processor? A 3 year old motherboard and processor would work fine for games. Just buy a fancy video card and some RAM.
The article was not titled "how to upgrade your system to play the latest games for $500" (but apparently it should have been).
Do you really believe that revamping the entire user interface MODEL (not just new or bigger or more colorful icons, but the whole way of using the application) for Office is just about chasing shiny things?
Yes, retraining was probably needed when they shifted from Win3.1 to Win95 (Program Manager to Start Menu). But since then, what has changed in the user interface model that required retraining? Didn't Apple have the same type of transition as they moved from Finder to Dock? How is that more evolutionary?
I'm curious what drastic changes Microsoft has made with every version that Apple has avoided. I really don't see the difference.
It sounds like you are saying "Microsoft is willing to try something completely new (innovate?)", while "Apple only takes existing stuff that you know and polishes it up a bit".
There is the XmlHttp object that makes full featured user interfaces on the web possible. See Gmail, Google Maps, etc.
ASP.NET seems like a new invention. Fully object oriented representation of user interface objects which render the appropriate HTML based on the user agent.
The new LINQ (while still not a product, there is a working demo compiler, so not exactly vaporware) extensions to the.NET Framework are innovative.
Just a few ideas.
But I think the word "innovation" is a distraction. Do we really care what is innovative? What does that mean? Any time someone mentions that a Microsoft product is innovative, someone else will bring out examples of products that worked similarly, but not necessarily with the same polish (as people will undoubtedly do with my suggestions). So, does adding that polish not count for anything? What if I created a company based on web seach, web based email, an IM client, etc, long after those things were possible... but I did it with a little extra polish? I'd be Google, and I'd be very popular. But am I innovative? Do you care?
It is not an insult to say that the page is similar to Google's. They acknowledge that Google was an inspiration. You aren't calling anyone out by saying so.
But we heard this joke before. They call it Virtual Earth, but right now most of their maps are only for the USA. We saw the exact same complaints when Google unveiled their product. Do you honestly - honestly - think it will stay that way? Or is it possible - possible? - that they will incrementally update the site with more data as they get to it?
Why would we discuss that? Is there even a question? What would be the argument against the creater/funder/owner of the content deserving the proceeds of their work? Was that remark based on the fact that people are mad at Lucas because they didn't like the last 2 movies? Or is it that people really dont think any creator deserves proceeds from their work? I'm not talking fair use or anything like that - I understand those arguments - they don't seem relevant here.
What is interesting is that you already have an account if you have an AIM Screen Name. I went to the website, logged in with my AIM credentials, and it brought me right into the inbox. No accepting any terms & conditions, etc. It never even told me what my email address is (though I assume it is screenname@aol.com).
Not sure why you felt compelled to include the Google News link in the post. But I suspect that is the kind of thing that puts Google News on shaky ground with content providers.
MSNBC prints a story, and you arguably give more credit (by putting the link first) for that content to Google News.
Micheal Dell is not the CEO of Dell, Inc. Michael Dell is not a commodity manager for Dell, Inc. Obviously he has input into the strategy for the company, but I don't think he single-handedly negotiates deals with suppliers.
Michael Dell only needs a single source for the OS on his personal computer. What Dell,Inc puts on their computers is unrelated to this story.
I don't know how much "muscle" Michael Dell has, but I'm sure he has enough "money" to afford the higher cost of a single personal copy of Microsoft Windows XP, if that is what you mean.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess my browsing wasn't as thorough as yours, because I checked and double-checked and was surprised to see that nobody had mentioned it.
And my post made no mention nor allusions to one school being better than the other - just more commonly known.
Not that it really changes the point of the story, but the post is slightly misleading. It was a UMass Dartmouth student - a school in Massachusetts. When most people hear Dartmouth alone, they think of the school in New Hampshire.
Here's my take:
He did it as a joke. He thought it was inconsequential. He wasn't trying to construct some elaborate consipiracy to implicate the other guy for the assassination. He was basically doing the equivalent of changing the screensaver on computers at Best Buy to say "SpideyCT is cool". It is funny to be able to do something so simple, and because it reaches such a large audience, looks like you did something special.
So yeah, he could have covered his tracks better, but I bet it never occurred to him to try. Why would it? In fact, if he had tried to cover it up more, it would have looked like he was trying to cover it up, suggesting that he thought he was doing something he could get in trouble for.
What makes you think security benefit was one of the goals? Its about changing the current implementation so that it no longer violates a patent.
They're using a Creative Commons license. They're creating an RSS extension, instead of coming up with an entirely new format. They worked with the RSS community to get feedback and fine tune. They're following the processes as defined for open source software.
Are those processes and licenses so fragile and irrelevant/impotent that they can be co-opted/corrupted so easily? If so, should any business in their right mind use any software based on such licenses?
The parent is a typical Slashbot kneejerk post, that adds nothing that we haven't heard for the last decade.
p yct_cYtbBtOBPDVAumMEdw!175.entry
It is especially juvenile considering the original statement from Ozzie specifically called out that a goal was to work with non-Microsoft products.
"We brainstormed about this "meshed world" and how we might best serve it - a world where each of these products and others' products could both manage these objects and synchronize each others' changes"
http://spaces.msn.com/members/rayozzie/Blog/cns!1
MS: "I like oranges"
You: "I think what you really mean was.. you don't like oranges!" bwahahaha, high five guys!
Slashdot: Burn! Man, that was insightful! High five!
>I can't wait to see this one.
You don't have to wait, it is already published. Instead of just spouting off, go read the spec and judge it on its technical merits, instead of adding another needless me too "MS sucks so this must suck" post.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/xml/rss/sse/
Then come back and give a reasoned opinion about the flaws in the proposed extension.
Nintendo has released their classic NES games on their latest handheld devices. I think that means the old "obsolete" stuff is still making money for them.
What a great way to try and cover for a perceived perfect track record.
Any misstep, just start the rumor (or have your zealot minions do it for you) that any mistake was on purpose. Apple really CAN do no wrong.
A chair is not necessary to use the computer to play games. I would never expect Dell to deliver a chair to me when I purchase a complete computer system.
A case, ok, you could probably get by without it. You would at least need to buy some sort of switch to connect to the motherboard to turn it on.
A mouse, monitor, and keyboard are necessary for any game I would want to play. I could maybe get by without speakers.
The argument that it is assumed that some peripherals are already owned is completely lame. If that were the case, why include a DVD-ROM drive? Heck, why include a motherboard and processor? A 3 year old motherboard and processor would work fine for games. Just buy a fancy video card and some RAM.
The article was not titled "how to upgrade your system to play the latest games for $500" (but apparently it should have been).
Do you really believe that revamping the entire user interface MODEL (not just new or bigger or more colorful icons, but the whole way of using the application) for Office is just about chasing shiny things?
Yes, retraining was probably needed when they shifted from Win3.1 to Win95 (Program Manager to Start Menu). But since then, what has changed in the user interface model that required retraining? Didn't Apple have the same type of transition as they moved from Finder to Dock? How is that more evolutionary?
I'm curious what drastic changes Microsoft has made with every version that Apple has avoided. I really don't see the difference.
That is an interesting take.
It sounds like you are saying "Microsoft is willing to try something completely new (innovate?)", while "Apple only takes existing stuff that you know and polishes it up a bit".
Go read Jakob Nielson's take on the new Office: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/wysiwyg.html
There is the XmlHttp object that makes full featured user interfaces on the web possible. See Gmail, Google Maps, etc.
.NET Framework are innovative.
ASP.NET seems like a new invention. Fully object oriented representation of user interface objects which render the appropriate HTML based on the user agent.
The new LINQ (while still not a product, there is a working demo compiler, so not exactly vaporware) extensions to the
Just a few ideas.
But I think the word "innovation" is a distraction. Do we really care what is innovative? What does that mean? Any time someone mentions that a Microsoft product is innovative, someone else will bring out examples of products that worked similarly, but not necessarily with the same polish (as people will undoubtedly do with my suggestions). So, does adding that polish not count for anything?
What if I created a company based on web seach, web based email, an IM client, etc, long after those things were possible... but I did it with a little extra polish? I'd be Google, and I'd be very popular. But am I innovative? Do you care?
Is there an open source solution that has solved the speech recognition problem?
Is speech recognition on linux better than that on the WinXP Tablet PC?
That's the last straw. I'm moving to linux, where the choices are much simpler.
And now he has you to thank for getting his websites mentioned in a +5 comment.
It is not an insult to say that the page is similar to Google's. They acknowledge that Google was an inspiration. You aren't calling anyone out by saying so.
2 6
Watch the interview with the development team here:
http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=915
But we heard this joke before. They call it Virtual Earth, but right now most of their maps are only for the USA. We saw the exact same complaints when Google unveiled their product.
Do you honestly - honestly - think it will stay that way? Or is it possible - possible? - that they will incrementally update the site with more data as they get to it?
What you, and everyone else that keeps posting references to the Office 2003 schema and related license, don't get is that this is a NEW format.
It is a new XML schema. New file format. New licensing policy.
Why would we discuss that? Is there even a question? What would be the argument against the creater/funder/owner of the content deserving the proceeds of their work?
Was that remark based on the fact that people are mad at Lucas because they didn't like the last 2 movies?
Or is it that people really dont think any creator deserves proceeds from their work? I'm not talking fair use or anything like that - I understand those arguments - they don't seem relevant here.
It uses your existing AOL or AIM screen name @aim.com - so no conflict with @aol.com
What is interesting is that you already have an account if you have an AIM Screen Name. I went to the website, logged in with my AIM credentials, and it brought me right into the inbox. No accepting any terms & conditions, etc. It never even told me what my email address is (though I assume it is screenname@aol.com).
Not sure why you felt compelled to include the Google News link in the post. But I suspect that is the kind of thing that puts Google News on shaky ground with content providers.
MSNBC prints a story, and you arguably give more credit (by putting the link first) for that content to Google News.
Micheal Dell is not the CEO of Dell, Inc.
Michael Dell is not a commodity manager for Dell, Inc.
Obviously he has input into the strategy for the company, but I don't think he single-handedly negotiates deals with suppliers.
Michael Dell only needs a single source for the OS on his personal computer. What Dell,Inc puts on their computers is unrelated to this story.
I don't know how much "muscle" Michael Dell has, but I'm sure he has enough "money" to afford the higher cost of a single personal copy of Microsoft Windows XP, if that is what you mean.
Reminds me of this past post:
MS: Beta Software Good Enough for Production Use
(Only, this time they're charging.)
The people that are interested don't care that it is still beta. The people that do not want to consume an unfinished product will stay away.