... there are certain laws about non-competitive behavior including blocking your competitors from accessing things that you yourself make freely available in implementations that you provide...
Citation please? Non competitive behaviour requires a monopoly in one area -- which area does Google have a monopoly in? Non-competitive behaviour also requires that you are leveraging a market you have a monopoly in to enter a new market. Being that Google does not have a monopoly on streaming media, how is it that they are acting illegally? Even if they were acting in a manner consistent with anti-trust, can you please cite the law regarding "blocking your competitors from accessing things that you yourself make freely available"?
None of this is confusing to MS. MS is just pissed that it is no longer the company dictating terms. Hell, as far as I am concerned Google has bent over backwards to assist MS. Look at MS history with regard to interoperability. Karma is a fucking bitch, eh MS?
Back in the 56k days the modem was inside the computer.
Only if you had some cheap winmodem. Most decent hardware modems were external. I had a Hayes Accura and a USR hardware modem; still do though I no longer use them. I have been hanging on to them because I have been thinking about setting up a FAX server in the house.
Aaahh.. but they never specified WinRT in the article, now did they? The articles were referring to full-blown Win8.
And you really can’t blame Acer for not sticking with Windows 8, as the company has put on the market a good number of different-sized tablets, laptops, hybrids and even all-in-one PC units. -- from the article
I dropped several hundred dollars on a new laptop for my wife about a year ago. Her uses: YouTube, FaceBook, web mail.
A chromebook might have been a much smarter investment for her, as she doesn't use half the functionality her laptop offers. Also, even though her laptop is orders of magnitude more powerful than the first servers I worked on, it *still* takes several minutes to cold-boot Windows. In fact, she recently got an Android phone and has pretty much forgotten about her laptop, using the phone for her online consumption instead.
I predict a new version of RT will soon be shipping which will deal with problems the initial tablet encountered.
From what I understand, the problems associated with Windows RT cannot really be fixed via a new version.
Marketing this product as "Windows", which confused the market place. A true lack of applications. A completely locked-down hardware device. Being extremely late to an already saturated market. These are all reasons that RT failed to gain much traction.
In fact, from what I understand, the hardware itself is not terrible though WinRT is a love or hate thing.
You are correct in regard to Surface Pro (for some reason I was thinking you could not disable secure boot), however you neglect to mention RT where you are 100% reliant upon MS to provide an update. I will also speculate (relying on MS history with regard to phones, zunes, watches etc...) that you will never see any meaningful upgrade on the device and you will be lucky if they provide security fixes for more than 2 years from now.
At least with the Android devices one can hope the device can be rooted and a cyanogenmod ( or some other 3rd party supplier ) OS can be installed.
Hell... if you are really bored you can ( attempt to ) roll your own Android bundle and install it. You have no such option with Surface RT. RT is designed to be in a landfill in a few years.
I have nothing against the Surface Pro if it is indeed open hardware. If that is the type of device you want/need at a price point that is good for you, that is great. I personally don't have a use for it, but to each his own.
* There is a hack to enable running third party non-metro apps on RT but noone knows how long that hack will keep working in the face of updates.
This hack will work until there is enough market share that MS feels it once again has enough influence to strong-arm its users. Or... the Surface RT fails completely.
I seriously doubt that Intel would pull resources from the Linux kernel. Intel's customers rely on Intel parts working correctly under Linux. Intel has much more to lose than Linus does if Intel pulls their support of the Linux kernel.
And yes, you are probably correct in that XP will be EOL before NetFlix HTML5 comes completely to fruition. I guess that is why I like Linux ( especially rolling distributions like Arch and Gentoo where there aren't even versions per se ). I really don't like forced obsolescence. If the hardware is still running ok and performing satisfactorily, I see no reason to upgrade.
Why are you still using windows XP as your main media machine?
Because it works fine as-is. Because it is running on hardware without Vista/7 drivers. Because, as you so kindly pointed out, XP is not quite EOL yet.
Note; I am not the original poster. I am just answering the question. My main media box is ArchLinux and I do just fine without NetFlix at all.
While it is true that Google's search and search algorithms are proprietary, the foundation for these is FOSS. In fact, wasn't it Google who released a bunch of performance patches for MySQL as FOSS? What about Google's summers of code? Google has given back to the Free software community much much more than MS, Oracle et al ever have. It is only natural that they reserve *some* knowledge so that they may continue to exist and, *Deity Forbid*, proft.
As far as "scorching the earth of mobile providers" that can't happen fast enough IMHO. I am tired of getting gouged by these SOBs. Don't get me wrong, I am all for a company turning a profit, but these leeches with their insane data plans and text bundling can't die fast enough. Not too mention, how are these providers being run out of business? These are the folks *enabling* Google by selling what their customers *want*.
I don't always agree with Google and their strategies, but compared to pretty much all of their competitors (and most of the members of this "FairSearch" group) they are saints. Imagine if MS had not been so slow to get the whole "internet" and later "mobile" things? Microsoft is a predator in all senses of the word and has proven this over and over throughout the course of their history. This is coming from a guy whose only tech certs are with MS.
I have long thought that Free software often made better sense than proprietary software, yet Free software has difficulty making in-roads. Usually (not always) it is because there is no one lobbying for FOSS and offering kickbacks, legal threats, etc.. Now that someone is lobbying for FOSS you are saying that is unfair? Really?
Slashdot Mirror
... there are certain laws about non-competitive behavior including blocking your competitors from accessing things that you yourself make freely available in implementations that you provide ...
Citation please? Non competitive behaviour requires a monopoly in one area -- which area does Google have a monopoly in? Non-competitive behaviour also requires that you are leveraging a market you have a monopoly in to enter a new market. Being that Google does not have a monopoly on streaming media, how is it that they are acting illegally? Even if they were acting in a manner consistent with anti-trust, can you please cite the law regarding "blocking your competitors from accessing things that you yourself make freely available"?
So... doing exactly what MS has been doing for 25 years now... oh, the irony.
What part of "third-party" is confusing to MS?
None of this is confusing to MS. MS is just pissed that it is no longer the company dictating terms. Hell, as far as I am concerned Google has bent over backwards to assist MS. Look at MS history with regard to interoperability. Karma is a fucking bitch, eh MS?
Back in the 56k days the modem was inside the computer.
Only if you had some cheap winmodem. Most decent hardware modems were external. I had a Hayes Accura and a USR hardware modem; still do though I no longer use them. I have been hanging on to them because I have been thinking about setting up a FAX server in the house.
Of course. Success comes with its own pardon. Only failure is punished. -- Niccoli Machiavelli
:)
FTFY
Aaahh.. but they never specified WinRT in the article, now did they? The articles were referring to full-blown Win8.
And you really can’t blame Acer for not sticking with Windows 8, as the company has put on the market a good number of different-sized tablets, laptops, hybrids and even all-in-one PC units. -- from the article
I dropped several hundred dollars on a new laptop for my wife about a year ago. Her uses: YouTube, FaceBook, web mail.
A chromebook might have been a much smarter investment for her, as she doesn't use half the functionality her laptop offers. Also, even though her laptop is orders of magnitude more powerful than the first servers I worked on, it *still* takes several minutes to cold-boot Windows. In fact, she recently got an Android phone and has pretty much forgotten about her laptop, using the phone for her online consumption instead.
I predict a new version of RT will soon be shipping which will deal with problems the initial tablet encountered.
From what I understand, the problems associated with Windows RT cannot really be fixed via a new version.
Marketing this product as "Windows", which confused the market place. A true lack of applications. A completely locked-down hardware device. Being extremely late to an already saturated market. These are all reasons that RT failed to gain much traction.
In fact, from what I understand, the hardware itself is not terrible though WinRT is a love or hate thing.
While there are certain hurdles, there certainly is an officially supported revision-control system: https://svn.openx.org/
Having said that, I don't see much there that is newer than the official "community" release.
You are correct in regard to Surface Pro (for some reason I was thinking you could not disable secure boot), however you neglect to mention RT where you are 100% reliant upon MS to provide an update. I will also speculate (relying on MS history with regard to phones, zunes, watches etc...) that you will never see any meaningful upgrade on the device and you will be lucky if they provide security fixes for more than 2 years from now.
At least with the Android devices one can hope the device can be rooted and a cyanogenmod ( or some other 3rd party supplier ) OS can be installed.
Hell... if you are really bored you can ( attempt to ) roll your own Android bundle and install it. You have no such option with Surface RT. RT is designed to be in a landfill in a few years.
I have nothing against the Surface Pro if it is indeed open hardware. If that is the type of device you want/need at a price point that is good for you, that is great. I personally don't have a use for it, but to each his own.
You are so right. I can't wait for Windows 9 upgrades on the Surface RT and Pro. Oh.. wait...
I think a genuine Windows running an x86 processor in a tablet is a compelling experience but RT is just a bad idea.
The problem with this is that when the OS takes up 25GB of disk space, it is not really practical for a tablet to run full blown Windows.
* There is a hack to enable running third party non-metro apps on RT but noone knows how long that hack will keep working in the face of updates.
This hack will work until there is enough market share that MS feels it once again has enough influence to strong-arm its users. Or... the Surface RT fails completely.
I seriously doubt that Intel would pull resources from the Linux kernel. Intel's customers rely on Intel parts working correctly under Linux. Intel has much more to lose than Linus does if Intel pulls their support of the Linux kernel.
No offense taken :)
And yes, you are probably correct in that XP will be EOL before NetFlix HTML5 comes completely to fruition. I guess that is why I like Linux ( especially rolling distributions like Arch and Gentoo where there aren't even versions per se ). I really don't like forced obsolescence. If the hardware is still running ok and performing satisfactorily, I see no reason to upgrade.
Why are you still using windows XP as your main media machine?
Because it works fine as-is.
Because it is running on hardware without Vista/7 drivers.
Because, as you so kindly pointed out, XP is not quite EOL yet.
Note; I am not the original poster. I am just answering the question. My main media box is ArchLinux and I do just fine without NetFlix at all.
.... $300/year for two PVRs on top of the $1,650/year for basic cable and internet is stupid.
You, sir, are unpatriotic. Please report to your local thought police station immediately for retraining.
Judging from account activity, I believe the submitter is a paid slashvertiser.
undoing accidental mod -- f'n slashdot, pick a mod method already!!!
...it was not being sold at a discount comparable to what Microsoft is doing with the surface.
Two words. Tax writeoff. This relates to the machines being given away as well.
My world for a mod point right now......
And if that isn't enough to make you want to kill a puppy I don't know what is.....
You might want to bring your sarcasm detector in to the shop. I don't believe it is working correctly :D
It seems to me you are arguing semantics.
While it is true that Google's search and search algorithms are proprietary, the foundation for these is FOSS. In fact, wasn't it Google who released a bunch of performance patches for MySQL as FOSS? What about Google's summers of code? Google has given back to the Free software community much much more than MS, Oracle et al ever have. It is only natural that they reserve *some* knowledge so that they may continue to exist and, *Deity Forbid*, proft.
As far as "scorching the earth of mobile providers" that can't happen fast enough IMHO. I am tired of getting gouged by these SOBs. Don't get me wrong, I am all for a company turning a profit, but these leeches with their insane data plans and text bundling can't die fast enough. Not too mention, how are these providers being run out of business? These are the folks *enabling* Google by selling what their customers *want*.
I don't always agree with Google and their strategies, but compared to pretty much all of their competitors (and most of the members of this "FairSearch" group) they are saints. Imagine if MS had not been so slow to get the whole "internet" and later "mobile" things? Microsoft is a predator in all senses of the word and has proven this over and over throughout the course of their history. This is coming from a guy whose only tech certs are with MS.
I have long thought that Free software often made better sense than proprietary software, yet Free software has difficulty making in-roads. Usually (not always) it is because there is no one lobbying for FOSS and offering kickbacks, legal threats, etc.. Now that someone is lobbying for FOSS you are saying that is unfair? Really?
That's unpossible!!!! Everyone knows there is no way to make money off of open source software, especially if you just give it away.
All profits must be tied to walled gardens and license fees. /end sarcasm