If that's the case, then why do people have trouble reading emails like the one I've included below? There is a text-only content segment of the message, and an html segment. A truly MIME compliant email reader will pick the one it can handle and display that.
----
Subject: Test
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 15:39:38 -0800
Organization: Popcorn Films - http://www.popcornfilms.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C1A811.FED4BDB 0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
test
test
test
test
--
Looking for an accomplished Win32 developer to work on your project?
Please check out my resume and portfolio: =
http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/resume.htm ; =
http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/portfolio. ht m
Experienced in UI development and design, applications architecture, and =
shipping projects on time and on budget.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2712.300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><STRONG>test</STRONG></ FONT></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><EM><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>test</FONT></EM></STRON G></DIV>
<DIV><EM><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>test</FONT></EM></DIV&g t;
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>test</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>--<BR>Looking for an accomplished Win32 =
developer=20
to work on your project?<BR>Please check out my resume and portfolio: <A =
href=3D"http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/re su me.htm">http://home.ear=
thlink.net/~simoncooke/resume.htm</A>=20
; <A=20
href=3D"http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/po rt folio.htm">http://home.=
earthlink.net/~simoncooke/portfolio.htm</A>& lt;BR>Experienced=20
in UI development and design, applications architecture, and shipping =
projects=20
on time and on budget.</FONT></DIV></BODY></ HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C1A811.FED4BDB0--
Re:The best way to convert people from Microsoft..
on
Borking Outlook Express
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
O.K., let's change the focus. Use a RFC Compliant e-mail program (not OE or Outlook) and you can belong to the list and read my mail. If you CHOOSE to not use a compliant mailer, well, that's your choice.
If the standard is to communicate in letters and you insist on using binary numbers, what would that make you? Elitist?
After all, everyone understands 1's and 0's don't they?
There's nothing about RFC compliancy here.
The poster on CrackMonkey notes that he has a number of tricks -- one is a header which sets the stationary on WebTV's to an unreadable color. Another is one that on some ISPs, shuts down the modem (which I actually think is more likely complete bullshit, due to the way that AT command strings work).
So there's a couple of lame hacks that try to make things difficult for some users. X-* headers are standards compliant, even if they might have different results on different systems.
The problem here is the UUEncoding init string that is automatically detected by Outlook Express. This is meant to be a convenience for the user; it'll automatically work out that there's an attachment in the post.
UUencoding is obsolete, by the way. MIME should be used instead. But hey, they have to keep it for interoperability with people who don't have MIME compliant browsers, don't they?
When users are arbitrarily excluded and abused in the name of proprietary software? How many Outlook badly formated HTML/word/rtf e-mail's must we put up with before we scream enough! (Well, I just ignore them myself.)
Try getting a MIME compliant email reader -- you know, MIME? That standard which has been around since about 1995/96?
Today I received a polite phone call from a fellow at Microsoft who works in the Windows Media group. He informed me that Microsoft has intellectual property rights on the ASF format and told me that, although I had reverse engineered it, the implementation was still illegal since it infringed on Microsoft patents
Hmmm... sounds like a developer getting above their station, rather than any kind of official legal position. Personally, I'd have asked to speak to their lawyers.
It looks like Micro$oft patented it [uspto.gov]. Can you use it in an open source software without being processed?
Given that MS have stated over and over to both other people and their own employees that they only use patents defensively -- eg. if someone sues them for patent infringement, they'll dig through their patent list and attack that company back with all the ones that they have infringed.
Of course, there's a certain amount of risk to just ignoring it. You could always license the patent. *shrugs*
I primarily use Windows. I've been using AA fonts under WinNT/2K for years, and I can't stand looking at a screen without them. MSFT have done a good job. What I have discovered in my brief forrays into Linux, is that Mozilla seems to do a horrid job of rendering AA fonts, even with the same fonts taken from my Windows partition. I don't understand it, but the same page in Mozilla under Linux is far inferior to when it's displayed under Windows, to the extent some smaller point sizes become almost unreadable.
That may be because Windows doesn't actually 'antialias' fonts until they get way too small (less than about 4 or 5 point), or way big (bigger than about 30 point). In the middle, it takes a half-antialiasing, half-hinting approach. So curves and diagonals get smoothed, but important high-frequency information in the font (ie. horizontal, vertical lines) don't get modified.
This gives nice sharp stems in the letter I, for example. And in 'i', the dot on top is antialiased, but the rest of the font is drawn as single-pixel lines (at least, at about 10pt on my screen it is).
An excellent explanation of antialiasing for LCDs can be found here [grc.com], and a HOWTO for implementing this on Linux is here [jmason.org]. The screenshots in the article do look better than I have been able to achieve, though.
An even better explanation not written by a muppet who doesn't seem to get it that NO, the Apple II did NOT have this first, and NO, his crappy implementation is NOT how it works -- he's only got a 1st order approximation -- can be seen here:
No, read this article [osopinion.com] and this one [osopinion.com] on osOpion.
The allegations? Microsoft not only sabotaged other companies programs, but also copied and embedded other companies code (DoubleSpace, from STAC--MSFT was found liable, btw).
Despite the rationalizations of/.'ers, stealing is a crime. MSFT stole code (and committed other crimes). (Also, from the 2nd article: MSFT didn't create a DOS, it bought one for $15k).
Pity that MSFT didn't steal any code from Stacker; it was a patent infringement case.
You know, a compression patent. Like Unisys's one on LZW? Kind of thing that would be easy for anyone to come up with? Kind of thing that/.ers tend to think of as Bad in the same way that Frankenstein thinks of fire?
Well, these days they have a reasonably display-independent graphics system (GDI+), which is unfortunately saddled with the fact that:
1. It's buggy. (create a bitmap to cover your entire window, and it'll be a pixel shy at the bottom and right sides).
2. It uses a mix of pixel coordinates and real-world units.
3. You have to switch to drawing things in a kind of reverse-polish notation if you're doing any kind of transformations. For example, drawing text so that the line goes vertically upwards can get real messy. Especially when you start measuring the bounds of it.
It probably needs a little time to mature -- heck, the documentation is 'pre-release'. But for now, I think a lot of people are going to stick with GDI for regular windows development.
You are wrong. The law is still valid. There are plenty of new technologies that aren't computer-related, largely (yes, I realize *everything* has some computer element to it these days, that's not my point). How about new surgical techniques? How about new mechanical systems in buildings? Sure, these things break, and go through a period of debugging while people suffer (or die on the operating table). but usually in short order (a few years), they are sorted out.
The problem is, it's the same thing that's being debugged every time when it's a surgical procedure, or a mechanical system.
Software changes. All the time. People write new versions, add functionality, take it and make changes. All the time.
I'm sure that if someone came up with a new way to do a kidney transplant every 6 months, there would be a lot of people dying too.
So take your pick; rapid evolution, or stagnant, bulletproof stability. I'm sure that if I had 12 years to develop an app, it'd be as solid as a rock at the end of it.
Well, for me, the GameCube controller is awkward; the symmetries are all wrong (two trigger buttons on the right, but only one on the left... what kind of crack were they smoking?), and the sticks themselves have sharp corners which dig into your fingers.
Sure, it's not as bulky. But it feels cheap and nasty... a bit like finding a drill bit in a plush toy.
Gamecube has an amazing controller, tremendous graphics, and the best hardware in the business. (Blah, blah, blah, Mhz, blah, blah, blah, the Xbox processor is going to be slow compared to a customized PPC G3 with a game-taillored vector unit... think Altivec on crack in Photoshop shootouts... Intel only looks good in integer math... games don't do integer math...) Also it brings Nintendo's franchises, which are the best in the business.
What does Xbox have? Hype? Newness?
No, it has a better controller and the best GPU in the business. And Altivec in the Photoshop shootouts? Who cares. You actually have to write SIMD versions of the Intel code to have a fair comparison -- and those comparisons were done on raw MMX code. NOT the same.
Read my response to CharonX. None of these can be bought in stores except for possibly the Win* products, and "Win" does not infringe on the trademark because it's not similar to "Windows" -- unlike "Lindows", which *is* similar.
And all the other ones are either open source projects, or shareware you can download from TuCows.
I direct your eyes to this paragraph:
Take a trip to your local computer shop and see for yourself how many products are called "Windows something" on the store shelf that AREN'T endorsed by Microsoft in any way and yet aren't sued
Of course, just because I direct them, doesn't mean you'll comprehend, so here goes:
Which of the items on their list are available in stores for purchase?
Here's a shortened list of programs and authors they used as examples to show that the windows trademark is somehow not being inforced.
WinZip WinZip Computing Inc.
WinAmp Nullsoft
Windows Backup Wizard RisingResearch.com
Windows Coloring Book Kinderware Inc.
Windows Commander Christian Ghisler
Windows Security Officer SSS Laboratories
Now out of these, which ones are operating systems that are supposed to mimick windows functionality? I think it's more possible to confuse something that is supposed to be windows, but not something that just runs on windows. So I don't see how doing this list going to help.
Hmmm... let's see... "Win" sounds nothing like Windows, doesn't read anything like Windows, so it's probably safe.
All of the others clearly state what they are in their name -- so there's no room for confusion.
Ergo, none of these infringe.
Lindows however, sounds like Windows. And the word, being a made up one, does nothing to fix the fact that it could be a misspelling or a misheard word. The name doesn't give any details, so the only guess you can make is that it's something simlar to Windows the OS. Ergo, it's an infringement.
How the hell so, just because it RYMES WITH WINDOWS?
On another note, there is a very large manufacturer and installer of WINDOWS in Michigan, they are called Wallside WINDOWS [wallside.com]. It's only one little step beyond this BS to say MicroSoft can sue this company for using their oh-so-special word: WINDOWS.
Whatta buncha wh*res.
Yes, because it rhymes with Windows, and it's a computer program.
Read up on trademark law some time -- you'll find it enlightening.
Basically, it boils down to this:
If it's possible that the consumer could get confused, there's a problem.
If there's no way that the consumer could get confused, then you can use the same or similar name.
This is why Wallside Windows can have that name -- consumers will NOT be confused.
However, release an OS called "WynDoze", and you'll have problems -- because consumers *could* be confused by the name.
Similarly, you could make radios under the name "Hertz Electronics", but you'd better not try to rent cars under that name. Or even under the name "Herts" or "Hurts Auto Rental".
Also, Microsoft is alleging that anytime someone uses the word "windows" that means Microsoft. Take a trip to your local computer shop and see for yourself how many products are called "Windows something" on the store shelf that AREN'T endorsed by Microsoft in any way and yet aren't sued.
Hey Michael...
Why don't YOU give a couple of examples if they're so prevalent? Because I've just checked, and I've not seen ANY.
Slashdot Mirror
If that's the case, then why do people have trouble reading emails like the one I've included below? There is a text-only content segment of the message, and an html segment. A truly MIME compliant email reader will pick the one it can handle and display that.
B 0"
m ; =
. ht m
e su me.htm">http://home.ear=
o rt folio.htm">http://home.=
----
Subject: Test
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 15:39:38 -0800
Organization: Popcorn Films - http://www.popcornfilms.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C1A811.FED4BD
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C1A811.FED4BDB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
test
test
test
test
--
Looking for an accomplished Win32 developer to work on your project?
Please check out my resume and portfolio: =
http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/resume.ht
http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/portfolio
Experienced in UI development and design, applications architecture, and =
shipping projects on time and on budget.
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C1A811.FED4BDB0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2712.300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><STRONG>test</STRONG></ FONT></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><EM><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>test</FONT></EM></STRON G></DIV>
<DIV><EM><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>test</FONT></EM></DIV&g t;
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>test</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>--<BR>Looking for an accomplished Win32 =
developer=20
to work on your project?<BR>Please check out my resume and portfolio: <A =
href=3D"http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/r
thlink.net/~simoncooke/resume.htm</A>=20
; <A=20
href=3D"http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/p
earthlink.net/~simoncooke/portfolio.htm</A>& lt;BR>Experienced=20
in UI development and design, applications architecture, and shipping =
projects=20
on time and on budget.</FONT></DIV></BODY></ HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C1A811.FED4BDB0--
O.K., let's change the focus. Use a RFC Compliant e-mail program (not OE or Outlook) and you can belong to the list and read my mail. If you CHOOSE to not use a compliant mailer, well, that's your choice.
If the standard is to communicate in letters and you insist on using binary numbers, what would that make you? Elitist?
After all, everyone understands 1's and 0's don't they?
There's nothing about RFC compliancy here.
The poster on CrackMonkey notes that he has a number of tricks -- one is a header which sets the stationary on WebTV's to an unreadable color. Another is one that on some ISPs, shuts down the modem (which I actually think is more likely complete bullshit, due to the way that AT command strings work).
So there's a couple of lame hacks that try to make things difficult for some users. X-* headers are standards compliant, even if they might have different results on different systems.
The problem here is the UUEncoding init string that is automatically detected by Outlook Express. This is meant to be a convenience for the user; it'll automatically work out that there's an attachment in the post.
UUencoding is obsolete, by the way. MIME should be used instead. But hey, they have to keep it for interoperability with people who don't have MIME compliant browsers, don't they?
That'd be PINE users, for a start.
Simon
When users are arbitrarily excluded and abused in the name of proprietary software? How many Outlook badly formated HTML/word/rtf e-mail's must we put up with before we scream enough! (Well, I just ignore them myself.)
Try getting a MIME compliant email reader -- you know, MIME? That standard which has been around since about 1995/96?
Simon
The point isn't to exclude MS users. The point is to exclude users of software that don't conform to the standard.
Which reminds me... I should send more HTML email, because PINE doesn't handle the MIME types correctly so readers who use it end up with gibberish.
There's two sides to every war.
Today I received a polite phone call from a fellow at Microsoft who works in the Windows Media group. He informed me that Microsoft has intellectual property rights on the ASF format and told me that, although I had reverse engineered it, the implementation was still illegal since it infringed on Microsoft patents
Hmmm... sounds like a developer getting above their station, rather than any kind of official legal position. Personally, I'd have asked to speak to their lawyers.
Si
It looks like Micro$oft patented it [uspto.gov]. Can you use it in an open source software without being processed?
Given that MS have stated over and over to both other people and their own employees that they only use patents defensively -- eg. if someone sues them for patent infringement, they'll dig through their patent list and attack that company back with all the ones that they have infringed.
Of course, there's a certain amount of risk to just ignoring it. You could always license the patent. *shrugs*
Simon
I primarily use Windows. I've been using AA fonts under WinNT/2K for years, and I can't stand looking at a screen without them. MSFT have done a good job. What I have discovered in my brief forrays into Linux, is that Mozilla seems to do a horrid job of rendering AA fonts, even with the same fonts taken from my Windows partition. I don't understand it, but the same page in Mozilla under Linux is far inferior to when it's displayed under Windows, to the extent some smaller point sizes become almost unreadable.
That may be because Windows doesn't actually 'antialias' fonts until they get way too small (less than about 4 or 5 point), or way big (bigger than about 30 point). In the middle, it takes a half-antialiasing, half-hinting approach. So curves and diagonals get smoothed, but important high-frequency information in the font (ie. horizontal, vertical lines) don't get modified.
This gives nice sharp stems in the letter I, for example. And in 'i', the dot on top is antialiased, but the rest of the font is drawn as single-pixel lines (at least, at about 10pt on my screen it is).
It's kind of clever, and works pretty well.
Si
An excellent explanation of antialiasing for LCDs can be found here [grc.com], and a HOWTO for implementing this on Linux is here [jmason.org]. The screenshots in the article do look better than I have been able to achieve, though.
e fault.htm
An even better explanation not written by a muppet who doesn't seem to get it that NO, the Apple II did NOT have this first, and NO, his crappy implementation is NOT how it works -- he's only got a 1st order approximation -- can be seen here:
http://research.microsoft.com/~jplatt/ClearType/d
Oh yeah; read the papers that he links to. That's where you'll get the real scoop on the technique.
Simon
It wouldn't work without the Heisenberg compensator....
Is that anything like the Eisenberg Uncertainty Hotdogs that I see at my local theatre?
Though where the uncertainty comes in is, I think, in what kind of meat it actually is in there.
Simon
say it can be built to scale using off-the-shelf components
If he keeps plutonium and tanks of tritium on the shelves in his house, I'd hate to see his kitchen cupboards.
No, read this article [osopinion.com] and this one [osopinion.com] on osOpion.
/.'ers, stealing is a crime. MSFT stole code (and committed other crimes). (Also, from the 2nd article: MSFT didn't create a DOS, it bought one for $15k).
/.ers tend to think of as Bad in the same way that Frankenstein thinks of fire?
The allegations? Microsoft not only sabotaged other companies programs, but also copied and embedded other companies code (DoubleSpace, from STAC--MSFT was found liable, btw).
Despite the rationalizations of
Pity that MSFT didn't steal any code from Stacker; it was a patent infringement case.
You know, a compression patent. Like Unisys's one on LZW? Kind of thing that would be easy for anyone to come up with? Kind of thing that
Simon
Important - she needs to see real opposition to Microsoft to counter their astroturf slaves. Wakeup!
Would that be the Slashdot Astroturf slaves then?
Oh heck y'all. Have a ball. Go on -- stuff the ballot box and deliberately try to destroy the company. I've had it with them anyway.
But you want to know how you can really hurt them?
Write better stuff than them, and make sure you spend at least *some* money on marketing. Most software companies don't spend ANYTHING.
Simon
Well, these days they have a reasonably display-independent graphics system (GDI+), which is unfortunately saddled with the fact that:
1. It's buggy. (create a bitmap to cover your entire window, and it'll be a pixel shy at the bottom and right sides).
2. It uses a mix of pixel coordinates and real-world units.
3. You have to switch to drawing things in a kind of reverse-polish notation if you're doing any kind of transformations. For example, drawing text so that the line goes vertically upwards can get real messy. Especially when you start measuring the bounds of it.
It probably needs a little time to mature -- heck, the documentation is 'pre-release'. But for now, I think a lot of people are going to stick with GDI for regular windows development.
Of course, I'll happily be proved wrong.
Si
You are wrong. The law is still valid. There are plenty of new technologies that aren't computer-related, largely (yes, I realize *everything* has some computer element to it these days, that's not my point). How about new surgical techniques? How about new mechanical systems in buildings? Sure, these things break, and go through a period of debugging while people suffer (or die on the operating table). but usually in short order (a few years), they are sorted out.
The problem is, it's the same thing that's being debugged every time when it's a surgical procedure, or a mechanical system.
Software changes. All the time. People write new versions, add functionality, take it and make changes. All the time.
I'm sure that if someone came up with a new way to do a kidney transplant every 6 months, there would be a lot of people dying too.
So take your pick; rapid evolution, or stagnant, bulletproof stability. I'm sure that if I had 12 years to develop an app, it'd be as solid as a rock at the end of it.
Simon
Interestingly, that's exactly how I feel about the GameCube one :)
:)
Your mileage may vary, I guess
Well, for me, the GameCube controller is awkward; the symmetries are all wrong (two trigger buttons on the right, but only one on the left... what kind of crack were they smoking?), and the sticks themselves have sharp corners which dig into your fingers.
Sure, it's not as bulky. But it feels cheap and nasty... a bit like finding a drill bit in a plush toy.
Simon
Gamecube has an amazing controller, tremendous graphics, and the best hardware in the business. (Blah, blah, blah, Mhz, blah, blah, blah, the Xbox processor is going to be slow compared to a customized PPC G3 with a game-taillored vector unit... think Altivec on crack in Photoshop shootouts... Intel only looks good in integer math... games don't do integer math...) Also it brings Nintendo's franchises, which are the best in the business.
What does Xbox have? Hype? Newness?
No, it has a better controller and the best GPU in the business. And Altivec in the Photoshop shootouts? Who cares. You actually have to write SIMD versions of the Intel code to have a fair comparison -- and those comparisons were done on raw MMX code. NOT the same.
Simon
Ever been to a glass shop?
Tinted windows by an auto shop?
Yet again, so what?
We're talking software here. Windows -- as in panes of glass -- are a different category altogether.
Have you ever even read up on trademark law? Ever? You should; it's obvious you know nothing about it.
This is why Mr. Mp3.com/Lindows himself asked for examples of *software*.
Si
You're an idiot.
Read my response to CharonX. None of these can be bought in stores except for possibly the Win* products, and "Win" does not infringe on the trademark because it's not similar to "Windows" -- unlike "Lindows", which *is* similar.
They wouldn't be sued if their name was "Lin"
Win isn't a similar word to Windows.
And all the other ones are either open source projects, or shareware you can download from TuCows.
I direct your eyes to this paragraph:
Take a trip to your local computer shop and see for yourself how many products are called "Windows something" on the store shelf that AREN'T endorsed by Microsoft in any way and yet aren't sued
Of course, just because I direct them, doesn't mean you'll comprehend, so here goes:
Which of the items on their list are available in stores for purchase?
Now stop being an ass.
Here's a shortened list of programs and authors they used as examples to show that the windows trademark is somehow not being inforced.
WinZip WinZip Computing Inc.
WinAmp Nullsoft
Windows Backup Wizard RisingResearch.com
Windows Coloring Book Kinderware Inc.
Windows Commander Christian Ghisler
Windows Security Officer SSS Laboratories
Now out of these, which ones are operating systems that are supposed to mimick windows functionality? I think it's more possible to confuse something that is supposed to be windows, but not something that just runs on windows. So I don't see how doing this list going to help.
Hmmm... let's see... "Win" sounds nothing like Windows, doesn't read anything like Windows, so it's probably safe.
All of the others clearly state what they are in their name -- so there's no room for confusion.
Ergo, none of these infringe.
Lindows however, sounds like Windows. And the word, being a made up one, does nothing to fix the fact that it could be a misspelling or a misheard word. The name doesn't give any details, so the only guess you can make is that it's something simlar to Windows the OS. Ergo, it's an infringement.
Read up on trademark law.
How the hell so, just because it RYMES WITH WINDOWS?
On another note, there is a very large manufacturer and installer of WINDOWS in Michigan, they are called Wallside WINDOWS [wallside.com]. It's only one little step beyond this BS to say MicroSoft can sue this company for using their oh-so-special word: WINDOWS.
Whatta buncha wh*res.
Yes, because it rhymes with Windows, and it's a computer program.
Read up on trademark law some time -- you'll find it enlightening.
Basically, it boils down to this:
If it's possible that the consumer could get confused, there's a problem.
If there's no way that the consumer could get confused, then you can use the same or similar name.
This is why Wallside Windows can have that name -- consumers will NOT be confused.
However, release an OS called "WynDoze", and you'll have problems -- because consumers *could* be confused by the name.
Similarly, you could make radios under the name "Hertz Electronics", but you'd better not try to rent cars under that name. Or even under the name "Herts" or "Hurts Auto Rental".
Read up. Enjoy. Learn something.
Simon
Microsoft is based in WA.
Lindows defence is going to hinge on the fact
that they have not done any business in WA
therefore M$ cant sue them.
Which is kind of odd... Trademarks are state-limited only if you don't register them. Once you register them, they apply country-wide.
Also, Microsoft is alleging that anytime someone uses the word "windows" that means Microsoft. Take a trip to your local computer shop and see for yourself how many products are called "Windows something" on the store shelf that AREN'T endorsed by Microsoft in any way and yet aren't sued.
Hey Michael...
Why don't YOU give a couple of examples if they're so prevalent? Because I've just checked, and I've not seen ANY.
Simon