I may (or not) have read a Cringley article or two linked out of/. in the past, but I doubt I will in the future, or at the very least won't take him seriously at all. I mean, the guy doesn't even know what side of the fence he's trying to be on. Check this out, from the first bit of his rant dealing with good news / bad news:
"The first [principle] says that people aren't really interested in good news, that bad news grabs our attention in a way good news never could. Frankly, I don't buy this."
Then later (re: Associated Press)
"It was easier to sell stories about bad news than about good news. The more people who died or who were at risk of dying, the better. Bad news sells, which is why we cover so much bad news. It is as simple as that."
Simple? Simple-minded perhaps. Which is it Bob: Bad news sells - or bad news doesn't sell? You can't have it both ways.
My advice to./ers: Don't let this guy's rant on tech tie you up in knots, when he obviously doesn't know jack-shit about journalism, a subject he _should_ know something about.
I don't think that the Mozilla team would have any luck getting "MindLink" to adopt their browser. Here's why: The MindSpring software package REQUIRES that you have IE4 or higher on your system. You can still use Netscape for the browser, but the interface of the software is dependent on some IE files. IMO, that's totally lame.
I'd bet that the EarthLink 5 mentioned is the same thing, just with EarthLink logos instead of MindSpring ones.
While the 17 year limit on patents may be technically correct, in practice I believe it's quite different. Someone _please_ correct me if I'm wrong here, but my belief here is based on some info of how Rainbow vacuum cleaners operate.
Rainbows use a water filtration system (kinda sorta like a bong:) instead of those godawful bags that need constant changes. I know of no other vacuum cleaner maker who uses such a system, and AFAIK, it's because of they've patented the water-filter thing for vacuum cleaners. The interesting bit here is - Rainbow has been making vacuum cleaners for quite a while and I understand they've held on to their patent by making subtle changes to the design just before the patent runs out and then getting a new patent.
Thus, effectively, they've managed to create for themselves an "infinite patent"
Couldn't UniSys do the same?
As I mentioned, I don't have the "facts" of this, just info I've heard (from a guy who used to fix Rainbows), so if anyone can clear it up, I'd appreciate it.
-m
BTW, if you've ever talked to anyone who's used a Rainbow, they'll tell you they're WAY better than traditional vacuums. Of course, they're also WAY WAY more expensive - I doubt it's the cost of the water.
Slashdot Mirror
I may (or not) have read a Cringley article or two linked out of /. in the past, but I doubt I will in the future, or at the very least won't take him seriously at all. I mean, the guy doesn't even know what side of the fence he's trying to be on. Check this out, from the first bit of his rant dealing with good news / bad news:
./ers: Don't let this guy's rant on tech tie you up in knots, when he obviously doesn't know jack-shit about journalism, a subject he _should_ know something about.
"The first [principle] says that people aren't really interested in good news, that bad news grabs our attention in a way good news never could. Frankly, I don't buy this."
Then later (re: Associated Press)
"It was easier to sell stories about bad news than about good news. The more people who died or who were at risk of dying, the better. Bad news sells, which is why we cover so much bad news. It is as simple as that."
Simple? Simple-minded perhaps. Which is it Bob: Bad news sells - or bad news doesn't sell? You can't have it both ways.
My advice to
I don't think that the Mozilla team would have any luck getting "MindLink" to adopt their browser. Here's why: The MindSpring software package REQUIRES that you have IE4 or higher on your system. You can still use Netscape for the browser, but the interface of the software is dependent on some IE files. IMO, that's totally lame.
I'd bet that the EarthLink 5 mentioned is the same thing, just with EarthLink logos instead of MindSpring ones.
While the 17 year limit on patents may be technically correct, in practice I believe it's quite different. Someone _please_ correct me if I'm wrong here, but my belief here is based on some info of how Rainbow vacuum cleaners operate.
:) instead of those godawful bags that need constant changes. I know of no other vacuum cleaner maker who uses such a system, and AFAIK, it's because of they've patented the water-filter thing for vacuum cleaners. The interesting bit here is - Rainbow has been making vacuum cleaners for quite a while and I understand they've held on to their patent by making subtle changes to the design just before the patent runs out and then getting a new patent.
Rainbows use a water filtration system (kinda sorta like a bong
Thus, effectively, they've managed to create for themselves an "infinite patent"
Couldn't UniSys do the same?
As I mentioned, I don't have the "facts" of this, just info I've heard (from a guy who used to fix Rainbows), so if anyone can clear it up, I'd appreciate it.
-m
BTW, if you've ever talked to anyone who's used a Rainbow, they'll tell you they're WAY better than traditional vacuums. Of course, they're also WAY WAY more expensive - I doubt it's the cost of the water.
to comment on something I know more than the average bear about
you know it