I would image to some web-heads, assembling a complex, heavily loaded, discussion-based magazine/community forum is the actual building of the website.
They just buy what server works, hardware details are for wrench monkeys:)
Any other field outside of IT, where people rarely work more than 40-50hrs a week...
If IT people are so focused on their own situations to really think they are the hardest workers in the business world, then they definitely DO need to get out more.
Believe it or not, some of the LUSERS actually work as many hours, in as demanding a role, that is as crucial, as the gods of IT.
Try to see the rest of your company for a change - you might be surprised that eveyone isn't playing Solitaire, screwing up OS configs and having beers.
If you look at the entire thread, you'll see an expanded specs list, including U.S. FCC approval.
[quote]
Would you care to define the conditions better? As stated, the work would be somwhere between 1/2 and 50 man years. 1/2 a man year should allow a competant DSP engineer to glue various existing bits together, finish off the missing pieces, and make a demonstrator. The other 49.5 man years would be needed if you want something approvable in a variety of markets, and which which really works on a wide variety of lines (particularly for V.90, which caused severe additional work in the early days working out how to handle the weird transformations often experiencd in some PCM networks).
[/quote]
[response]
However, to restate this and tighten it down: The bounty will be paid for a modem approvable in US (FCC Part 68, if I'm not mistaken) and which really works on most lines (and on hardware line noise simulator).
About 6 man-months sounds about right from most of people I've talked for compleme implementation of mod/demod part. Please note that also in conditions are implementation of virtual UART and compression protocols.
The bounty is not exactly intended for someone in US anyway, as 20k is below market rate for 6 months of a qualified DSP engineer's time, and
then there are other pieces that need to be done. This is also not intended to be for someone who wants to do it part-time in US, as it'll take waaaaay too long.
[/response]
"NASA's Mars Climate Orbiter was lost in space last week because engineers failed to make a simple conversion from English units to metric, an embarrassing lapse that sent the $125 million craft fatally close to the Martian surface, investigators said yesterday."
"In September 1999, the Mars Climate Orbiter presumably burned up in the Martian atmosphere because propulsion engineers failed to convert English and metric units.
Three months later, its sibling spacecraft the Mars Polar Lander likely crashed because a software glitch shut off the descent engines prematurely, sending it on a fatal plunge into the red planet."
Re:problem with large storage mp3 players
on
80 Gig MP3 Player
·
· Score: 1
That's what I do also - works well enough for now, and is simple to keep track of.
The problem, though, is what do you do when you want to listen to a random mix of all current hip hop? Or all European trance with lengths over 20 minutes?
This is what more advanced tools can do. Metadata, outside of the mp3 id info, with a good interface, can allow more complex listening patterns than a simple filesystem-based approach
The guy who submitted this story "Bondheadguy" resolves to RobJMcCready@yahoo.com... A quick search on "Rob McCready" yields a University of Toronto grad student (or maybe former grad student now) who is developing hardware based face recognition equipment. Check out This link...
Now you can make your own decision about helping him out (or not).
Third section up from the bottom is what they plan on doing for power management.
Intel's ACPI implementation is out there now, and is being used by FreeBSD. They are currently waiting for the 2.5 fork to submit it for Linux. As a measure of the complexity of ACPI, consider that this implementation has "5-7 person years" of development work in it already, and does not yet have support for putting systems to sleep.
So ACPI is important, despite its bulk. 2.4 already has the ACPI interpreter in it, but 2.5 will be where we see a truly working implementation of this standard.
This is one of the best articles I've seen on Slashdot in the recent past. Great article find, great detail, knowledgable comments and good discussion.
Excellent work - here's to wishing for more like this.
Install it with the -net option. This installs the program in a central place and allows for multiuser use (even across a network) (~200MB).
Then run setup as each user you want to be able to use SO (see install guide). This will install a local SO directory in the user's $HOME, with config filers, etc. (~2 MB)
Now each user can run SO with their own settings, without installing all ~200MB in each user's $HOME
Sure, p2p users don't own the copyright on the underlying data being transferred.
However, FastTrack (or KaZaA, Morpheous or whomever) owns the copyright on the client and server, and have put access control on that system. As such, it seems like the RIAA is reverse engineering *that* system. Potential DMCA violation.
You're looking at the wrong copyright as being protected by the DMCA.
P.S. potential DMCA violation because there might very well be (probably is) an allowance for investigating theft of some underlying copyright through the DMCA-protected system. Some sort of safe-harbor provision.
PayPal is not a bank. Hear it straight from the horse's mouth:
I can say I'm not a bank either, but if I meet the qualifications as set out in Federal and State bank regulations, I will and should be regulated as such.
What the company says is not as important as how the government acts.
The Microsoft Tax refers to third party vendors forced to pay Microsoft for selling a system, whether or not Windows is included. So most include it because they're already paying for it.
Not true. Microsoft was forced to stop these contracts during the first DOJ investigation ~1995. Currently OEMs only pay for what they ship. Although volume plays a large part in the OEM's price per copy, so the power obviously still resides with Redmond.
Well, the alternative is to be Berkshire Hathaway, and have shares that trade for $40,000.
Microsoft is worth what Microsoft is worth (snide comments to yourself, pls:) Divide that cumulative market value by ~$100 (around where you'd like a share price to be), and that tells you the number of shares you'll have.
Keep a reasonable float, and you'll have $40,000 shares. Which decreases diverse ownership, increases volatility and makes most companies declare a split. Which is how MSFT got to where it is today.
"Please wait while Helix GNOME update downloads a list of updates available for your system. This is done without any data being sent to Helix Code, Inc."
"oh-ok - I dont mind then..."
Did YOU read the source code? No? Then I guess you "don't mind then" if the Update Agent sends your email/passwords to Helix/Ximian.
I am not a huge fan of Microsoft either, but the silly SlaphDash.org knee-jerk "Micro$oft suxors" reaction to any mention of them is just moronic.
You are correct about employment-at-will. Absent a contract, you and/or the employer can end the relationship at any time, for any reason (subject to the conditions you stated).
However, the Non-Compete would be a separate, distinguishable contract, and could be enforceable even if verbal. Your conduct (implied acceptance) would cause you to accept their offer on the terms they offered. A simple email says you agree to blah, blah probably is not enough. However, a discussion with a manager wherein you are told that the NC is mandatory, and the company would not hire you without it, might be, even if you accept the offer with your actions or words, but not your signature.
Problems of proof are left as an exercise for the reader:)
Alcohol is not physically addictive ?!?! Were you drunk when you posted this?
I certainly a fan of the drink, but I'll the first to admit that it is most certainly physically addictive.
Harcore alcoholics get physical withdrawl symptons when the get off their regular patterns, including the DTs (delerium tremens - shakes), agitation, profuse sweating, hallucinations and seizures. See this or a local Google.com near you.
Perhaps you were thinking of marijuana, which has not been proven to be physically addictive (although, like anything, it can can psycological addiction, aka "I like doing it, and am not quiting").
Imputed interest is calculated in arm's length transactions. That is, if between dispassionate parties to a contract, the loan is $1000 and no interest is due, then the transaction is really a zero coupon loan: the loan is *really* for $900, and the $1000 you repay includes interst. This is the imputed interest calculated by the IRS.
If your father gave your $1000 now and you will repay $1000 at a later date, the IRS will attribute the lack of interest as a gift, "motivated by love, kindness or generosity." No taxes on gifts.
If like the first example, two dispassionate parties to an arm's length transaction negotiate a $1000 loan, with $1000 due at a later date, and no interest being charged, the the IRS will look at the facts and circumstances of the transcation. Dispassionate business people don't give away money, therefore some other consideration must have been present in the transaction. That invisible consideration WILL be taxed, just like any barter transaction will be taxed.
I'm not sure about in the UK, but in the US general advertisments are NOT contracts.
Newspapers adverts are solicitations of offers, that is, asking you to come in and offer them the sale price for the item.
If they don't want to sell it to you at the price you just offered, they don't have to. Nothing wrong there.
Several exceptions to this are specific sales to specific customers(e.g. $10.00 printer to the first customer in our Dallas, Texas store who can answer this trivia question:...) and bait-and-switch regulations (administered by either the U.S. Federal Trade Commission or similar state agencies, and violating statues, but NOT breaching private contracts).
As for privacy policies, I'm not sure. Depending on the case law (of which I'm not an expert), there might or might not be a contract. Problem: what consideration (normally, but not necessarily, $$$) did you give? Perhaps your demographic info/email address/etc. Perhaps not enough.
If not a breach of contract, you can normally argue for promissory estoppel (detrimental reliance). Promise made that you relied on to your detriment. In this case, "your detriment" might be hard to prove. Since you were willing to give your email address to ToySmart (and perhaps shown to have been spread by you all over the internet), then how have you been harmed? No harm, no foul.
Of course, these are all problems with private actions against ToySmart. In cases such as these, it is nice to have something like the FTC fighting on your side.
While everyone is racing to come up with companies that Red Hat can/should/must purchase in order to survive, perhaps a little financial realism should creep into the conversation.
Regardless of Red Hat's market cap ($5.1 Bn as I write this), it is not as if they have this much cash or tangible assets sitting around to go shopping with. While lots of deals are made with the funny-money that is internet stock, if you look at the most outrageous, you find vastly overvalued firms buying other vastly overvalued companies with their overvalued stock. While the (supposed) dollar figures make the news, for the boards and analysts that are negotiating the terms of the deals, the current share price and market cap are largely ignored.
If a company approached SGI with an unsolicited bid, SGI would do an independent valuation of what the potential acquirer is offering, including cash, stock, brand, synergy, economies of scale, cultural fit, distribution channels, workforce alignment and overlap, external alliances, potential accounting and tax issues, international exposure, etc.
While you may buy and sell RHAT for whatever the current market price is, and that times outstanding shares is technically defined as its Market Cap, do not think for an INSTANT that any sane Board of Directors would take that overvalued paper as representing anything near what Red Hat would actually be bringing to the table, and ultimately giving to SGI's shareholders.
SGI's Board has a fiduciary obligation to look out for its shareholders, and the value of its shares, including long-term results. To the shareholders of SGI, Red Hat as a whole is worth maybe $1 Bn, if that. Buy SGI? A much better idea would be for SGI to buy Red Hat (Global Crossing, anyone?)
Remeber when looking at the crazy valuations of Amazon, Ebay, etc. that they have positioned themselves as a strong brand, a company with diverse alliances and growth opportunities, and perhaps most importantly, as companies that are the undisputed leaders in their sectors, with scales that are hard to match, and size that potential entrants/competitiors will be hard pressed to overcome, even in the long run.
Red Hat has none of this. They may have a strong brand, but it is certainly NOT the same as an Amazon or Ebay are in their fields. Entrance is easy, there are virually no scales to overcome, capital investment is small, competition is easy, and Red Hat has no real advantage other than some level of mindshare, which is tenuous and fleeting, particularly in this business sector and as young as Red Hat's is.
Red Hat, although having a lot of acquisition resources in the linux space, is simply not able to pursue major acquisitions at this point. They will most assuredly have a hard time properly managing their OWN growth in the near future, much less absorbing any companies of any significant size.
Invest in Cygnus, MetroWorks, distribution channels, RHLABS, R&D: Yes.
Try and purchase any company valued at more than $100 million: forget about it.
I would seriously like an explanation on how making a product incompatible with a competing product is a monopolistic practice. Or is it only OK for the smaller company to do to the larger company.
Yes, it is ok for only the smaller (non-monopolist) to do so. There really aren't any "monopolistic practices." There are business practices which are perfectly legal in a competitive marketplace, but become illegal for one company to do when it has gained a monopoly.
Having a monoploy is not illegal, or even necessarily bad (depending on the industry/environment). When one achieves a monopoly, the law implies that you have undertaken a public trust to some extent, and thus must conduct yourself in a more "polite" way.
It is when one uses a monopoly to obtain advantage in other areas that you run afoul of the law. Examples:
- locking out ceratin gas stations when you are the only viable oil company - bundling non-related software with your monopoly product - penalizing licensees of your monopoly product who choose to include products that you don't approve of - in the instant case, making changes to code that has no other purpose than to make competitor's products incompatible - (this being similar to an illegal tax shelter-doing things in order to reduce taxes that have no other legitimate purpose, or that any normal business person would not do)
In these cases, you have abused your position as "trustee", which role implies a sort of fiduciary duty to manage this "monopolistic trust" in a manner than accords with its position as a semi-public good.
Most of the practices that Microsoft is defending now would be perfectly legal for another company to do. That is why some people have a hard time accepting that some of what Microsoft is accused of doing is wrong. It seems to go against the U.S.'s "free-for-all" system.
But if they would realize that they are only half-correct, and that in addition Microsoft is limited by anti-trust law that doesn't apply to other companies, then they might see the situation for what it really is.
KOrganizer uses vCalendar natively as its file format. vCalender is an industry-wide open file format with RFCs.
It is supported by many programs (see bottom of page above) including Lotus Notes, Netscape Communicator, Outlook 98, Starfish Sidekick98, and the Palm III uses it to sync up between systems.
Slashdot Mirror
Although...,
I would image to some web-heads, assembling a complex, heavily loaded, discussion-based magazine/community forum is the actual building of the website.
They just buy what server works, hardware details are for wrench monkeys :)
Yes! A underrated, under-known show. Funniest sitcom in the past number of years.
I'm more saddened by Phil Hartman's death than almost anyone in the past 10 years.
Any other field outside of IT, where people rarely work more than 40-50hrs a week...
If IT people are so focused on their own situations to really think they are the hardest workers in the business world, then they definitely DO need to get out more.
Believe it or not, some of the LUSERS actually work as many hours, in as demanding a role, that is as crucial, as the gods of IT.
Try to see the rest of your company for a change - you might be surprised that eveyone isn't playing Solitaire, screwing up OS configs and having beers.
If you look at the entire thread, you'll see an expanded specs list, including U.S. FCC approval.
[quote]
Would you care to define the conditions better? As stated, the work would be somwhere between 1/2 and 50 man years. 1/2 a man year should allow a competant DSP engineer to glue various existing bits together, finish off the missing pieces, and make a demonstrator. The other 49.5 man years would be needed if you want something approvable in a variety of markets, and which which really works on a wide variety of lines (particularly for V.90, which caused severe additional work in the early days working out how to handle the weird transformations often experiencd in some PCM networks).
[/quote]
[response]
However, to restate this and tighten it down: The bounty will be paid for a modem approvable in US (FCC Part 68, if I'm not mistaken) and which really works on most lines (and on hardware line noise simulator).
About 6 man-months sounds about right from most of people I've talked for compleme implementation of mod/demod part. Please note that also in conditions are implementation of virtual UART and compression protocols.
The bounty is not exactly intended for someone in US anyway, as 20k is below market rate for 6 months of a qualified DSP engineer's time, and then there are other pieces that need to be done. This is also not intended to be for someone who wants to do it part-time in US, as it'll take waaaaay too long.
[/response]
"NASA's Mars Climate Orbiter was lost in space last week because engineers failed to make a simple conversion from English units to metric, an embarrassing lapse that sent the $125 million craft fatally close to the Martian surface, investigators said yesterday."
Washington Post
**********
"In September 1999, the Mars Climate Orbiter presumably burned up in the Martian atmosphere because propulsion engineers failed to convert English and metric units.
Three months later, its sibling spacecraft the Mars Polar Lander likely crashed because a software glitch shut off the descent engines prematurely, sending it on a fatal plunge into the red planet."
CNN
That's what I do also - works well enough for now, and is simple to keep track of.
The problem, though, is what do you do when you want to listen to a random mix of all current hip hop? Or all European trance with lengths over 20 minutes?
This is what more advanced tools can do. Metadata, outside of the mp3 id info, with a good interface, can allow more complex listening patterns than a simple filesystem-based approach
One of these days, I might actually use one :)
Yes, or something close to it. See this Slashdot comment:
The guy who submitted this story "Bondheadguy" resolves to RobJMcCready@yahoo.com... A quick search on "Rob McCready" yields a University of Toronto grad student (or maybe former grad student now) who is developing hardware based face recognition equipment. Check out This link...
Now you can make your own decision about helping him out (or not).
See http://lwn.net/2001/features/KernelSummit/ for fairly comprehensive list of changes planned on for 2.5.
Third section up from the bottom is what they plan on doing for power management.
Intel's ACPI implementation is out there now, and is being used by FreeBSD. They are currently waiting for the 2.5 fork to submit it for Linux. As a measure of the complexity of ACPI, consider that this implementation has "5-7 person years" of development work in it already, and does not yet have support for putting systems to sleep.
So ACPI is important, despite its bulk. 2.4 already has the ACPI interpreter in it, but 2.5 will be where we see a truly working implementation of this standard.
Sure - just assign to 'if', and never have to type 'if' again !
This is one of the best articles I've seen on Slashdot in the recent past. Great article find, great detail, knowledgable comments and good discussion.
Excellent work - here's to wishing for more like this.
Install it with the -net option. This installs the program in a central place and allows for multiuser use (even across a network) (~200MB).
Then run setup as each user you want to be able to use SO (see install guide). This will install a local SO directory in the user's $HOME, with config filers, etc. (~2 MB)
Now each user can run SO with their own settings, without installing all ~200MB in each user's $HOME
Sure, p2p users don't own the copyright on the underlying data being transferred.
However, FastTrack (or KaZaA, Morpheous or whomever) owns the copyright on the client and server, and have put access control on that system. As such, it seems like the RIAA is reverse engineering *that* system. Potential DMCA violation.
You're looking at the wrong copyright as being protected by the DMCA.
P.S. potential DMCA violation because there might very well be (probably is) an allowance for investigating theft of some underlying copyright through the DMCA-protected system. Some sort of safe-harbor provision.
PayPal is not a bank. Hear it straight from the horse's mouth:
I can say I'm not a bank either, but if I meet the qualifications as set out in Federal and State bank regulations, I will and should be regulated as such.
What the company says is not as important as how the government acts.
The Microsoft Tax refers to third party vendors forced to pay Microsoft for selling a system, whether or not Windows is included. So most include it because they're already paying for it.
Not true. Microsoft was forced to stop these contracts during the first DOJ investigation ~1995. Currently OEMs only pay for what they ship. Although volume plays a large part in the OEM's price per copy, so the power obviously still resides with Redmond.
Well, the alternative is to be Berkshire Hathaway, and have shares that trade for $40,000.
Microsoft is worth what Microsoft is worth (snide comments to yourself, pls :) Divide that cumulative market value by ~$100 (around where you'd like a share price to be), and that tells you the number of shares you'll have.
Keep a reasonable float, and you'll have $40,000 shares. Which decreases diverse ownership, increases volatility and makes most companies declare a split. Which is how MSFT got to where it is today.
Hate to criticize
Personal CallerID-Aware 'Answering Machines'? by Cliff on Tuesday February 20
Lots of information about Caller-ID, with selected actions based on calling number, but also more basic stuff.
"Please wait while Helix GNOME update downloads a list of updates available for your system. This is done without any data being sent to Helix Code, Inc."
"oh-ok - I dont mind then..."
Did YOU read the source code? No? Then I guess you "don't mind then" if the Update Agent sends your email/passwords to Helix/Ximian.
I am not a huge fan of Microsoft either, but the silly SlaphDash.org knee-jerk "Micro$oft suxors" reaction to any mention of them is just moronic.
Very Close.
You are correct about employment-at-will. Absent a contract, you and/or the employer can end the relationship at any time, for any reason (subject to the conditions you stated).
However, the Non-Compete would be a separate, distinguishable contract, and could be enforceable even if verbal. Your conduct (implied acceptance) would cause you to accept their offer on the terms they offered. A simple email says you agree to blah, blah probably is not enough. However, a discussion with a manager wherein you are told that the NC is mandatory, and the company would not hire you without it, might be, even if you accept the offer with your actions or words, but not your signature.
Problems of proof are left as an exercise for the reader :)
Alcohol is not physically addictive ?!?! Were you drunk when you posted this?
I certainly a fan of the drink, but I'll the first to admit that it is most certainly physically addictive.
Harcore alcoholics get physical withdrawl symptons when the get off their regular patterns, including the DTs (delerium tremens - shakes), agitation, profuse sweating, hallucinations and seizures. See this or a local Google.com near you.
Perhaps you were thinking of marijuana, which has not been proven to be physically addictive (although, like anything, it can can psycological addiction, aka "I like doing it, and am not quiting").
Imputed interest is calculated in arm's length transactions. That is, if between dispassionate parties to a contract, the loan is $1000 and no interest is due, then the transaction is really a zero coupon loan: the loan is *really* for $900, and the $1000 you repay includes interst. This is the imputed interest calculated by the IRS.
If your father gave your $1000 now and you will repay $1000 at a later date, the IRS will attribute the lack of interest as a gift, "motivated by love, kindness or generosity." No taxes on gifts.
If like the first example, two dispassionate parties to an arm's length transaction negotiate a $1000 loan, with $1000 due at a later date, and no interest being charged, the the IRS will look at the facts and circumstances of the transcation. Dispassionate business people don't give away money, therefore some other consideration must have been present in the transaction. That invisible consideration WILL be taxed, just like any barter transaction will be taxed.
Newspapers adverts are solicitations of offers, that is, asking you to come in and offer them the sale price for the item.
If they don't want to sell it to you at the price you just offered, they don't have to. Nothing wrong there.
Several exceptions to this are specific sales to specific customers(e.g. $10.00 printer to the first customer in our Dallas, Texas store who can answer this trivia question:...) and bait-and-switch regulations (administered by either the U.S. Federal Trade Commission or similar state agencies, and violating statues, but NOT breaching private contracts).
As for privacy policies, I'm not sure. Depending on the case law (of which I'm not an expert), there might or might not be a contract. Problem: what consideration (normally, but not necessarily, $$$) did you give? Perhaps your demographic info/email address/etc. Perhaps not enough.
If not a breach of contract, you can normally argue for promissory estoppel (detrimental reliance). Promise made that you relied on to your detriment. In this case, "your detriment" might be hard to prove. Since you were willing to give your email address to ToySmart (and perhaps shown to have been spread by you all over the internet), then how have you been harmed? No harm, no foul.
Of course, these are all problems with private actions against ToySmart. In cases such as these, it is nice to have something like the FTC fighting on your side.
While everyone is racing to come up with companies that Red Hat can/should/must purchase in order to survive, perhaps a little financial realism should creep into the conversation.
Regardless of Red Hat's market cap ($5.1 Bn as I write this), it is not as if they have this much cash or tangible assets sitting around to go shopping with. While lots of deals are made with the funny-money that is internet stock, if you look at the most outrageous, you find vastly overvalued firms buying other vastly overvalued companies with their overvalued stock. While the (supposed) dollar figures make the news, for the boards and analysts that are negotiating the terms of the deals, the current share price and market cap are largely ignored.
If a company approached SGI with an unsolicited bid, SGI would do an independent valuation of what the potential acquirer is offering, including cash, stock, brand, synergy, economies of scale, cultural fit, distribution channels, workforce alignment and overlap, external alliances, potential accounting and tax issues, international exposure, etc.
While you may buy and sell RHAT for whatever the current market price is, and that times outstanding shares is technically defined as its Market Cap, do not think for an INSTANT that any sane Board of Directors would take that overvalued paper as representing anything near what Red Hat would actually be bringing to the table, and ultimately giving to SGI's shareholders.
SGI's Board has a fiduciary obligation to look out for its shareholders, and the value of its shares, including long-term results. To the shareholders of SGI, Red Hat as a whole is worth maybe $1 Bn, if that. Buy SGI? A much better idea would be for SGI to buy Red Hat (Global Crossing, anyone?)
Remeber when looking at the crazy valuations of Amazon, Ebay, etc. that they have positioned themselves as a strong brand, a company with diverse alliances and growth opportunities, and perhaps most importantly, as companies that are the undisputed leaders in their sectors, with scales that are hard to match, and size that potential entrants/competitiors will be hard pressed to overcome, even in the long run.
Red Hat has none of this. They may have a strong brand, but it is certainly NOT the same as an Amazon or Ebay are in their fields. Entrance is easy, there are virually no scales to overcome, capital investment is small, competition is easy, and Red Hat has no real advantage other than some level of mindshare, which is tenuous and fleeting, particularly in this business sector and as young as Red Hat's is.
Red Hat, although having a lot of acquisition resources in the linux space, is simply not able to pursue major acquisitions at this point. They will most assuredly have a hard time properly managing their OWN growth in the near future, much less absorbing any companies of any significant size.
Invest in Cygnus, MetroWorks, distribution channels, RHLABS, R&D: Yes.
Try and purchase any company valued at more than $100 million: forget about it.
Steve Hamlin
http://hamlinx.com
I would seriously like an explanation on how making a product incompatible with a competing product is a monopolistic practice. Or is it only OK for the smaller company to do to the larger company.
Yes, it is ok for only the smaller (non-monopolist) to do so. There really aren't any "monopolistic practices." There are business practices which are perfectly legal in a competitive marketplace, but become illegal for one company to do when it has gained a monopoly.
Having a monoploy is not illegal, or even necessarily bad (depending on the industry/environment). When one achieves a monopoly, the law implies that you have undertaken a public trust to some extent, and thus must conduct yourself in a more "polite" way.
It is when one uses a monopoly to obtain advantage in other areas that you run afoul of the law. Examples:
- locking out ceratin gas stations when you are the only viable oil company
- bundling non-related software with your monopoly product
- penalizing licensees of your monopoly product who choose to include products that you don't approve of
- in the instant case, making changes to code that has no other purpose than to make competitor's products incompatible - (this being similar to an illegal tax shelter-doing things in order to reduce taxes that have no other legitimate purpose, or that any normal business person would not do)
In these cases, you have abused your position as "trustee", which role implies a sort of fiduciary duty to manage this "monopolistic trust" in a manner than accords with its position as a semi-public good.
Most of the practices that Microsoft is defending now would be perfectly legal for another company to do. That is why some people have a hard time accepting that some of what Microsoft is accused of doing is wrong. It seems to go against the U.S.'s "free-for-all" system.
But if they would realize that they are only half-correct, and that in addition Microsoft is limited by anti-trust law that doesn't apply to other companies, then they might see the situation for what it really is.
KOrganizer uses vCalendar natively as its file format. vCalender is an industry-wide open file format with RFCs.
It is supported by many programs (see bottom of page above) including Lotus Notes, Netscape Communicator, Outlook 98, Starfish Sidekick98, and the Palm III uses it to sync up between systems.
VCS is the extension KOrganizer uses, I take it?