Wasn't Microsoft saying that Open Source was the one that didn't innovate?
And where is this innovation you are talking about? Whether you like it or not, MS has made many interface, IDE, and administration innovations. What has Linux done, before any other OS? Open Source yields stable software, not innovative software.
I agree with you entirely. It is very hard to get a trademark, never mind win a lawsuit when you use a common word for something. Apple isn't trademarked, but Apple Computer is. You may notice that most sites are trademarking thier dot com. Amazon is not trademarked, but Amazon.com is since its basically a different word (though to most net-types.com is only a qualifier).
You have a machine here that is way into six figures and you want to try Linux to save money? Guy, the cost of NT is neglible in your case. By all means ivestigate your options, Linux, NT, Solaris, etc, but dont be an idiot and try to save an extra 10 or 20 grand. Choose the best OS (whatever that is) and you'll end up with the cheapest solution.
All those things you listed are material wealth or legal tender. A domain name is simply a registration. In essence the government owns all names and lisences the registration to NSI, who in turn passes that right to the consumer. It is similar in someways to a phone number, versus the phone.
Same here, thats how I discovered PunkAss.com. I saw it was available, thought about it for a few weeks, and couldn't resist so I finally snapped it up. I've had a few people that want to buy it, but they will never give me an offer price, so I tell them no.
No, having a lisence plate that says FORD is not the same as having FORD.com. One is a useless personal id, the other is a common destination that would cause confusion. The point of trademarking is to avoid "first come first serve" type tactics, and brand name confusion. Nobody can start a car company named Ford because that would cause harm to thier reputation. If you have a legal trademark (which is not just registering it, but using it), you should be entitled to some protection, and domain names should be protected in this manner.
Hmmm, 98% of $15 means that the record company makes $14.70? Sorry, not true. As far as I know, the artist makes about $1.00 to $1.50 per CD. The rest is for the recording company, the distributor, the distributor, and the record store. Why do these make 90% of the cost? Because they bear 100% of the cost? Who pays for media, advertising, recording, promoting, selling, returns? Not the artist. Members of a group probably make a couple hundred thousand at most off the CD if it goes platinum, but this doesn't matter. An artist makes most of the money off the concerts and other things. Of all parties involved, the artist probably makes the most profit.
And why does a $100,000,000 movie cost $19.95 on tape and a $500,000 album cost $14.95? Because the movie made a bunch of money at the MOVIE THEATER. Most good movies will cover thier cost at the box office, and profit off the par-per-view, video sales and royalties.
For a bunch of people that are all caught up in how smart and progressive they think they are, there is very little research done here at/. Its pretty easy to tell who got a computer from thier parents when they left for thier all-expenses paid trip to school, and those that built it out of spare parts and duct tape between going to school and working to pay for school.
Do you really think Bill Gates is in it for the money? Sure, he started MS to make money, but if he was in it for the money, he would have gotten out after a few billion. There isnt much you can do with 90 that you couldn't do with 50 billion. I think his aim is to influence and improve the world in the way he sees fit (whether he is accomplishing this is another discussion). From what I read, he is frighteningly normal (for a geek). He doesnt use his money to run for office, he doesn't run around with a Michael Jackson style entourage. He runs a software company like thousands of other people out there. He just happens to run the largest one. This applies to many of the top billionaire execs (possibly excepting egomaniac Ellison). If I had Gates' wealth, I don't think I would do much different than he does.
(and don't give me any of that "risk" bull either -- I've yet to see one destitute executive)
Sorry to flame you like this, but this is one of the more retarded statements I've seen on./ in a long time. You don't see destitute executives because they GOT FIRED AND ARE NO LONGER EXECUTIVES! I don't see anyone that got killed from smoking, because they are dead, and thus I can't see them. Executives make alot of money, true. Is it justified? Who knows. But they do run a high risk. Most have thier personal wealth tied up in thier company, and for every golden parachute you read about, there's probably 1 or two execs that lost everything. Get a clue.
Because its true? $1000 doesn't really put a dent in the TCO of a server...
Re:Good idea, VERY poor implementation
on
DIVX is dead
·
· Score: 1
That is why I said partner with Blockbuster, thus making them a member of "the DIVX people".
Good idea, VERY poor implementation
on
DIVX is dead
·
· Score: 1
I really liked the idea of movies on demand, with the benefits of payperview and rentals, but if Circuit City had done the following for DivX it probably would have gotten support and succeeded.
Partnered with Blockbuster for distribution. If I want a movie, I don't want to go to a mall. Blockbuster could have generated about the same revenue as a rental.
They should have done it as a wrapper, not a through and through format. This would have allowed for easier implementation by distributors and you wouldn't lose any of the cool DVD features.
Made an open, liscenced standard. This would get them the money and still have good market standing.
They basically got too greedy and closed themselves out of what could have been a huge opportunity.
p.s. And privacy was NOT an issue, as others have noted about rental cards/accounts.
You obviously have not heard the rumors then. They are planning on a Titanic II, and it will have Leonardo in it (at a rumored $30 million paycheck). I don't know how they will work him into it because I though he died in the first one (I didn't see it). They way women talk about him, makes me feel like testosterone is a bad thing...
But where I disagree, is that I don't think suing is the right choice, unless something of harm actually happens. And who determines if harm happened? The courts do. Libel can result in permanent damage, some which may never be realized. This is why libel is a tricky legal arena. If someone calls you a pedophile, your boss may not fire you because he realizes the accusation is baseless. What about when you are looking for a job, and your prospective employer types your name into AltaVista and link number one calls you a pedophile? That's certainly not going to help, and people being people will believe something that is written unless proven otherwise.
Well note that the tape/record situation was pre-internet. People would buy records because it was hard to tape them and if nobody you knew had the record you couldn't tape it. Now you can go to an FTP site and fill up your hard drive with ease. Thinking mp3's won't hurt record sales (note that this hurts the artist too, not just the company) is foolish. The best thing mp3 does now is let people discover unsigned, unpromoted artists who aren't losing money because they never would have sold anything anyways.
Wouldn't this information belong to your employer, since they "created" it? You simply agree to it. Who really cares if someone knows your salary? When can it be used against you in a way it isnt now (credit,etc.)?
How many/. readers would pay $30/year to read it? Very few. And the best part of/. is that there are so many readers, so it would quickly decay and die, just because you don't want to see ads. Using clickthrough rates is a poor evaluator anyways. A company doesnt measure the effectiveness of its radio campaign by how many calls they get immediately after each ad, they measure by how much they sell overall.
I can't wait until we can block ALL advertisements on the net. Things will be so much cooler when you have to pay to go to every website and there is no good content available. These pesky free information sites and search engines are a bane to the future of the information age.
Seriously, are you really enough of a dumbass that you think these sites don't have to pay thier employees? Someone has to pay the piper, and if its not advertisers, it YOU!
29% are planning to move to NT within 12 months. 20% are considering Linux as a possible OS alternative in the future.
Sounds to me like the questions are not equal (I don't think they were meant to be). Comparing these statistics is erroneous, as planning is alot different than considering. And future is alot longer than 12 months, they could mean 5 years. Puffing out your chests by spouting figures like this just makes the whole community look worse. Take the following statement, which is close to the survey's: I am planning on wearing clothes tomorrow, but I have considered streaking in the future...
Just close your eyes and imagine as many really suckful software aspects you can like an inconsitent interface, poor help system, non-intuitive commands and menus. Now wrap them around a Lotus-(i.e. poor)-quality system and you've just demo'ed Domino (and Notes at the same time)...
Slashdot Mirror
Wasn't Microsoft saying that Open Source was the one that didn't innovate?
And where is this innovation you are talking about? Whether you like it or not, MS has made many interface, IDE, and administration innovations. What has Linux done, before any other OS? Open Source yields stable software, not innovative software.
I agree with you entirely. It is very hard to get a trademark, never mind win a lawsuit when you use a common word for something. Apple isn't trademarked, but Apple Computer is. You may notice that most sites are trademarking thier dot com. Amazon is not trademarked, but Amazon.com is since its basically a different word (though to most net-types .com is only a qualifier).
You have a machine here that is way into six figures and you want to try Linux to save money? Guy, the cost of NT is neglible in your case. By all means ivestigate your options, Linux, NT, Solaris, etc, but dont be an idiot and try to save an extra 10 or 20 grand. Choose the best OS (whatever that is) and you'll end up with the cheapest solution.
All those things you listed are material wealth or legal tender. A domain name is simply a registration. In essence the government owns all names and lisences the registration to NSI, who in turn passes that right to the consumer. It is similar in someways to a phone number, versus the phone.
Same here, thats how I discovered PunkAss.com. I saw it was available, thought about it for a few weeks, and couldn't resist so I finally snapped it up. I've had a few people that want to buy it, but they will never give me an offer price, so I tell them no.
No, having a lisence plate that says FORD is not the same as having FORD.com. One is a useless personal id, the other is a common destination that would cause confusion. The point of trademarking is to avoid "first come first serve" type tactics, and brand name confusion. Nobody can start a car company named Ford because that would cause harm to thier reputation. If you have a legal trademark (which is not just registering it, but using it), you should be entitled to some protection, and domain names should be protected in this manner.
Why? Because they preach intolerance and stereotypes and want to infringe on other's rights to free speech and free thought?
Perhaps only the sites of hypocrites should be hacked?
Hmmm, 98% of $15 means that the record company makes $14.70? Sorry, not true. As far as I know, the artist makes about $1.00 to $1.50 per CD. The rest is for the recording company, the distributor, the distributor, and the record store. Why do these make 90% of the cost? Because they bear 100% of the cost? Who pays for media, advertising, recording, promoting, selling, returns? Not the artist. Members of a group probably make a couple hundred thousand at most off the CD if it goes platinum, but this doesn't matter. An artist makes most of the money off the concerts and other things. Of all parties involved, the artist probably makes the most profit.
/. Its pretty easy to tell who got a computer from thier parents when they left for thier all-expenses paid trip to school, and those that built it out of spare parts and duct tape between going to school and working to pay for school.
And why does a $100,000,000 movie cost $19.95 on tape and a $500,000 album cost $14.95? Because the movie made a bunch of money at the MOVIE THEATER. Most good movies will cover thier cost at the box office, and profit off the par-per-view, video sales and royalties.
For a bunch of people that are all caught up in how smart and progressive they think they are, there is very little research done here at
Do you really think Bill Gates is in it for the money? Sure, he started MS to make money, but if he was in it for the money, he would have gotten out after a few billion. There isnt much you can do with 90 that you couldn't do with 50 billion. I think his aim is to influence and improve the world in the way he sees fit (whether he is accomplishing this is another discussion). From what I read, he is frighteningly normal (for a geek). He doesnt use his money to run for office, he doesn't run around with a Michael Jackson style entourage. He runs a software company like thousands of other people out there. He just happens to run the largest one. This applies to many of the top billionaire execs (possibly excepting egomaniac Ellison). If I had Gates' wealth, I don't think I would do much different than he does.
(and don't give me any of that "risk" bull either -- I've yet to see one destitute executive)
./ in a long time. You don't see destitute executives because they GOT FIRED AND ARE NO LONGER EXECUTIVES! I don't see anyone that got killed from smoking, because they are dead, and thus I can't see them. Executives make alot of money, true. Is it justified? Who knows. But they do run a high risk. Most have thier personal wealth tied up in thier company, and for every golden parachute you read about, there's probably 1 or two execs that lost everything. Get a clue.
Sorry to flame you like this, but this is one of the more retarded statements I've seen on
Because its true? $1000 doesn't really put a dent in the TCO of a server...
That is why I said partner with Blockbuster, thus making them a member of "the DIVX people".
Partnered with Blockbuster for distribution. If I want a movie, I don't want to go to a mall. Blockbuster could have generated about the same revenue as a rental.
They should have done it as a wrapper, not a through and through format. This would have allowed for easier implementation by distributors and you wouldn't lose any of the cool DVD features.
Made an open, liscenced standard. This would get them the money and still have good market standing.
They basically got too greedy and closed themselves out of what could have been a huge opportunity.
p.s. And privacy was NOT an issue, as others have noted about rental cards/accounts.
You obviously have not heard the rumors then. They are planning on a Titanic II, and it will have Leonardo in it (at a rumored $30 million paycheck). I don't know how they will work him into it because I though he died in the first one (I didn't see it). They way women talk about him, makes me feel like testosterone is a bad thing...
F83h2lkHG3lk#H@
But where I disagree, is that I don't think suing is the right choice, unless something of harm actually happens.
And who determines if harm happened? The courts do. Libel can result in permanent damage, some which may never be realized. This is why libel is a tricky legal arena. If someone calls you a pedophile, your boss may not fire you because he realizes the accusation is baseless. What about when you are looking for a job, and your prospective employer types your name into AltaVista and link number one calls you a pedophile? That's certainly not going to help, and people being people will believe something that is written unless proven otherwise.
Well note that the tape/record situation was pre-internet. People would buy records because it was hard to tape them and if nobody you knew had the record you couldn't tape it. Now you can go to an FTP site and fill up your hard drive with ease. Thinking mp3's won't hurt record sales (note that this hurts the artist too, not just the company) is foolish. The best thing mp3 does now is let people discover unsigned, unpromoted artists who aren't losing money because they never would have sold anything anyways.
I have neither physical or metal disabilities and I'm more than willing to prove either.
Seriously, geek is only a negative term in context. I'd say its less negative than jock or hacker or nerd.
Wouldn't this information belong to your employer, since they "created" it? You simply agree to it. Who really cares if someone knows your salary? When can it be used against you in a way it isnt now (credit,etc.)?
How many /. readers would pay $30/year to read it? Very few. And the best part of /. is that there are so many readers, so it would quickly decay and die, just because you don't want to see ads.
Using clickthrough rates is a poor evaluator anyways. A company doesnt measure the effectiveness of its radio campaign by how many calls they get immediately after each ad, they measure by how much they sell overall.
I can't wait until we can block ALL advertisements on the net. Things will be so much cooler when you have to pay to go to every website and there is no good content available. These pesky free information sites and search engines are a bane to the future of the information age.
Seriously, are you really enough of a dumbass that you think these sites don't have to pay thier employees? Someone has to pay the piper, and if its not advertisers, it YOU!
29% are planning to move to NT within 12 months.
20% are considering Linux as a possible OS alternative in the future.
Sounds to me like the questions are not equal (I don't think they were meant to be). Comparing these statistics is erroneous, as planning is alot different than considering. And future is alot longer than 12 months, they could mean 5 years. Puffing out your chests by spouting figures like this just makes the whole community look worse. Take the following statement, which is close to the survey's: I am planning on wearing clothes tomorrow, but I have considered streaking in the future...
Just close your eyes and imagine as many really suckful software aspects you can like an inconsitent interface, poor help system, non-intuitive commands and menus. Now wrap them around a Lotus-(i.e. poor)-quality system and you've just demo'ed Domino (and Notes at the same time)...
Wow, $10 for software for two years. You really got hosed on that one. Maybe you should call the DA or something...
FYI: FRAMESET is a per-spec tag, the others are not.