I would hat to have see this being discussed openly like because I'm sure that the folks at Red Hat don't know what they are doing. It's so important for them to realize what AOL will do to them. Look at what they did to ICQ.
Once upon a time you could download the program for free. Now you have to actually pay for it and every other IM you write gets an advertisement attached to it.
Look at WinAmp. Another free product that AOL has corrupted and ruined. have you noticed the monthly charge they've placed on it?
Or AOLServer. I can't believe they actually open sourced their own web server. What a bunch of idiots, I'm sure they'll get around to making that propietary soon.
And lets not forget how they closed down the mozilla project.
Oh and I remmeber when their TOC protocol for their AIM program accidentally "leaked" out, they shut down all the projects out there that used the protocol.
I'm sure that if AOL takes over redhat, they will propietize linux, they might even charge for the distrobution. They WILL destryo red hat out of spite.
I have never been convinced of the so-called dangers of the AOL/TW merger. You seem fairl conversant and I was wondering if you could clarify some of your statements.
--The article appropriately invoked the specter of the AOL-Time Warner merger. In the case of AOL/TW, a single corporate conglomerate will control 1. A considerable array of content and 2. a significant percentage of the U.S. cable infrastructure.--
As it is right now, what you mentioned in points 1 and 2 are both aspects of Time Warner which is already a single entity. What is it that AOL is adding to the mix besides 25 million customers? Also what is this significant percentage? I was under the impression that TW cable could only reach 20 percent of the population.
--If the FCC/FTC fails to ensure that AOL/TW opens up its pipeline to competing ISP's, the corporation would be in a unique position to selectively discriminate against competing ISP's and content providers.--
Thats very much like saying that TW Warner as owner of the cable company (and the content provider here)can effect what we are seeing so that we ignore it's competitors. Yet most media companies deal with each other on a regular basis. I feel that I must be missing your point.
I would hate to see the day that a man or company can work hard to produce a product and then be forced by the government to hand over the fruit of his labors to any one that comes by whining that they are a victim of a monopoly.
I don't neccesarily think that locking out a rival isp is good. But what right do they have for using those lines? Did they pay for those lines? Did they dig the ground, lay out the money, do anything to entitle them to use those lines? NO! Those people are the parasites on the back of economy.
If you think that the government should force a cable company to open those lines I think you should support the government in buying those lines with your money.
Don't condemn a company for being successful.
Slashdot Mirror
I would hat to have see this being discussed openly like because I'm sure that the folks at Red Hat don't know what they are doing. It's so important for them to realize what AOL will do to them. Look at what they did to ICQ.
Once upon a time you could download the program for free. Now you have to actually pay for it and every other IM you write gets an advertisement attached to it.
Look at WinAmp. Another free product that AOL has corrupted and ruined. have you noticed the monthly charge they've placed on it?
Or AOLServer. I can't believe they actually open sourced their own web server. What a bunch of idiots, I'm sure they'll get around to making that propietary soon.
And lets not forget how they closed down the mozilla project.
Oh and I remmeber when their TOC protocol for their AIM program accidentally "leaked" out, they shut down all the projects out there that used the protocol.
I'm sure that if AOL takes over redhat, they will propietize linux, they might even charge for the distrobution. They WILL destryo red hat out of spite.
thank god thats not going to happen
I have never been convinced of the so-called dangers of the AOL/TW merger. You seem fairl conversant and I was wondering if you could clarify some of your statements.
--The article appropriately invoked the specter of the AOL-Time Warner merger. In the case of AOL/TW, a single corporate conglomerate will control 1. A considerable array of content and 2. a significant percentage of the U.S. cable infrastructure.--
As it is right now, what you mentioned in points 1 and 2 are both aspects of Time Warner which is already a single entity. What is it that AOL is adding to the mix besides 25 million customers? Also what is this significant percentage? I was under the impression that TW cable could only reach 20 percent of the population.
--If the FCC/FTC fails to ensure that AOL/TW opens up its pipeline to competing ISP's, the corporation would be in a unique position to selectively discriminate against competing ISP's and content providers.--
Thats very much like saying that TW Warner as owner of the cable company (and the content provider here)can effect what we are seeing so that we ignore it's competitors. Yet most media companies deal with each other on a regular basis. I feel that I must be missing your point.
thank you
I would hate to see the day that a man or company can work hard to produce a product and then be forced by the government to hand over the fruit of his labors to any one that comes by whining that they are a victim of a monopoly. I don't neccesarily think that locking out a rival isp is good. But what right do they have for using those lines? Did they pay for those lines? Did they dig the ground, lay out the money, do anything to entitle them to use those lines? NO! Those people are the parasites on the back of economy. If you think that the government should force a cable company to open those lines I think you should support the government in buying those lines with your money. Don't condemn a company for being successful.