"Not all of the companies involved will be able to make enough money out of these products to stay in business."
They assume that every F/OSS database is a 'company' with the goal of 'making money' - which while I wont go so far as to say that any of them specifically arent (most of them I've never even heard of), I will say that it isnt inherent that they arent - being a company with a goal of making money isnt a prerequisite for writing a database engine.
I'll even throw in that even if the system they choose is a 'company' 'product', as long as it is F/OSS,even if the 'company' ceases to exist, they doesnt mean the program will cease to exist, and in fact if there is a sufficient userbase it is likely that someone else (perhaps even one of the organizations using it) will pick up the ball on bugfixes/security, and maybe even enhancement - you can pretty much bet that if a company producing a proprietary licensed app goes under, no one is likely to pick that up.
IDE? Or you mean some sort of clicky-pointy thing that people who dont really know how to program use? Hrm. I didnt even know there was one for PHP (and I've been writing stuff in PHP for 5+ years now) I think perhaps you place too much importance on this.
The point isnt that you as an end-user without programming skill have access to the source, the point is that hundreds of others who *do* have programming skills, have access to the source. Or hat you as the end user, posessing the source, could provide it to a contracted programmer, etc, if the original/current developer/company 'goes away' for some reason.
If your proprietary DB developer/company 'goes away' (or even just if they decide to discontinue the product in question), you are compeletely SOL and have no choice but to beg them for mercy. You have *no* option to contract from other persons for the programming or support you need, since no one else has (or ever will have) access to do so.
Yes, and if you make a point of sticking with F/OSS, even if the 'company' goes away, you still have the source, and can either support it in-house, or contract seperately for support.
As noted elsewhere, there is just as much concern over wether a proprietary app company will 'be around' (eg not gone out of business). At least with F/OSS, you have the source, and can contract seperately for support, whereas with a proprietary 'product' if the vendor goes belly-up, you are SOL.
How does burning grass pellets result in a fuel? It seems to me that it would result in burnt, used up grass pellets (eg, soot and ash).
Now perhaps grass pellets might *be* a clean, better fuel, but as far as I can tell burning them is the act of using that fuel, not the method of production of the fuel.
All I'd be happy about is if/when they couldnt/didnt advertise a price lower than that which they actually require someone to fork over to leave the store with the item.
If they cant use rebates to advertised a 'lower (after rebate) price', then rebates arent of much use to the retailers/mfrs/etc either. The whole point was that they wanted to be able to advertise the lower price, catching the gullible folk, without really lowering the price.
If they find some other motivation to continue offering them, fine, as long as the price shown in big letters on the signs/ads/etc is the amount of cash you have to part with at the register before they will let you walk out with the item.
In two words - competition, and marketing. They *want* to advertise lower prices, to attract more customers. Basically this just means that (hopefully) they are voluntarily doing what I thought they should be forced to do - whatever price they advertise in large print *has* to be the amount they demand from you at the register, no more of this loaning them money and then waiting around for them to repay it to you. (without interest, and with the additional expense of time and usually postage on your part)
I beleive most state laws concerning sales tax require that the price shown be that *prior* to the tax being added, and I beleive there is a specific exception for measured products like gas pumps (since people often have exactly, (eg) $10 on them and run the pump until it gets to $10 - if tax was added after, they'd be stuck.
Also, the 9.99 instead of 10.00 has nothing to do with tax - and yes it is entirely a way to make it look like it costs less than it does, for those buyers who are incapable of rounding in there head. Just get used to thinking "$10" anytime you see "9.99"
And of course they like the people who pay the full "before rebate" price, and then never bother with the forms, or who give up after making no headway, etc.
Rebates have always been a way to lower the 'perceived' price (well, at least for the gullible) without really lowering the price.
If you want to sell your item based on a 39.95 price, why else would you demand on collecting $80 from me and force me to wait around to get $40 back? Why should *loan* you (retailer, manufacturer, whoever) $40 interest-free?
If you just changed the price to the intended 'after rebate' price, then you would have to worry about fraud, returns, etc. You wouldnt have the overhead of receiving money and then having to make sure you only gave it back to the 'right people'. In fact, if companies offering rebates can afford to pay a staff to process rebates, they must be making a bundle off people who never get their rebates, otherwise it wouldnt be cost effective.
I dont buy consumer electronics at retail all that often - but anytime I've considered doing so I've prety much figured the same way - However much cash I have to bring to the store is the price of the item.
In fact, I've always thought it would be entertaining, if a store advertised (eg) "39.95 (in huge print) - after $30 and $50 rebates (in tiny print)" to go to the store, bringing exactly 39.95 (plus enough for tax, etc) and take the item to the register, and hand them that amount at the check out, and when they wanted more, pointed out (very vocally and very angrily) that the price displayed was 39.95, not the higher amount, and then after they (presumably) refused to let me out the door paying only the "advertised" price, walked out the door leaving the item there, and making lots of noise about it as I did so - the whold point being to A. force them to deal with an unhappy (lost) customer, B. have to carry the item back and put it on the shelf again, and C. call as much attention to I could (both to the store, as well as any other customers at the registers, etc) that they had lost a sale over the stupidity.
I dont want to. I expect to click on links in articles and have them go directly to the page that they imply that they intend to, without having to remember a special login for each site, without having to go thru a fifty question registration form to make a throwaway login each time, without having to cobble together special plugins, etc. In short, I expect WWW links to work they way that users of the WWW have expected them to all along.
It would really be nice if/. would stop posting links that didnt lead to where the story implies they lead, or at the very least, tag those articles in a manner which makes it easy for those who share my expectations about links to just completely suppress them as if they didnt exist (which they might as well not, without any working link)
The link posted appears to be to some sort of sign up page, and not a news story. I for one would greatly appreciate if/. would stop posting links to sign up pages.
If it absolutely must do so, then establish a flag that will be set for those/. entries that include such (useless) links, and allow readers to set a preference to have all such entries suppresed.
I generally find 'A+', and 'MCSE' to be 'anti-certifications'. Eg, someone who thought they could use a paper certification they get for $20 and taking a test that they memorized the answers to in place of actually knowing wtf they are doing. Plus most of them are usually MS-weiners anyway. The solution to all Windows problems is to *remove* Windows. The solution to all Windows virus problems is to *remove* the virus (which is Windows itself).
But other than that, yes this guy is something of an idiot.
Unless you are entirely inept, rolling in the dough, completely lazy, or some combination of all of the above, calling a 'mechanic, plumber, carpenter, or electrician' isnt always either desirable or feasible. Lots of people 'do their own' work in all of those areas. In fact lots of people *do* in fact build their own houses (some contract out large work such as excavation or pouring a foundation, but some do that on their own too).
So they really think that anyone smart enough to use VoIP for their 'terrorist communications' wouldnt be smart enough to use (encrypted) point-to-point SIP, instead of going thru a commercial VoIP-to-PSTN provider?
Im sure his tuituion bill, if itemized, would include an 'High speed Internet access' line item.
However, yes, it is their network, and their AUP can be anything they want it to be. But one would hope that they were not misinformed as to the (externally) legality of particular network protocols when making those decisions.
I suspect ADTI is more opposed to GPL software than they are to BSD-licensed. After all, they can freely steal from the latter. (Nothing against FreeBSD, I use it myself.)
"We are acknowledging that end users who merely open and read government documents that are saved as Office XML files within software programs will not violate the license."
Unless I've purchased software from MS, I'm not bound by any sort of license restrictions MS wants to impose on its customers, even assuming they even have the right to impose that restriction.
But of course, MS 'allowing' non-MS software to read its formats, and actually *documenting* the format so as to actually enable that, are two entirely different things.
Slashdot Mirror
"Not all of the companies involved will be able to make enough money out of these products to stay in business."
,even if the 'company' ceases to exist, they doesnt mean the program will cease to exist, and in fact if there is a sufficient userbase it is likely that someone else (perhaps even one of the organizations using it) will pick up the ball on bugfixes/security, and maybe even enhancement - you can pretty much bet that if a company producing a proprietary licensed app goes under, no one is likely to pick that up.
They assume that every F/OSS database is a 'company' with the goal of 'making money' - which while I wont go so far as to say that any of them specifically arent (most of them I've never even heard of), I will say that it isnt inherent that they arent - being a company with a goal of making money isnt a prerequisite for writing a database engine.
I'll even throw in that even if the system they choose is a 'company' 'product', as long as it is F/OSS
IDE? Or you mean some sort of clicky-pointy thing that people who dont really know how to program use? Hrm. I didnt even know there was one for PHP (and I've been writing stuff in PHP for 5+ years now) I think perhaps you place too much importance on this.
The point isnt that you as an end-user without programming skill have access to the source, the point is that hundreds of others who *do* have programming skills, have access to the source. Or hat you as the end user, posessing the source, could provide it to a contracted programmer, etc, if the original/current developer/company 'goes away' for some reason.
If your proprietary DB developer/company 'goes away' (or even just if they decide to discontinue the product in question), you are compeletely SOL and have no choice but to beg them for mercy. You have *no* option to contract from other persons for the programming or support you need, since no one else has (or ever will have) access to do so.
Yes, and if you make a point of sticking with F/OSS, even if the 'company' goes away, you still have the source, and can either support it in-house, or contract seperately for support.
As noted elsewhere, there is just as much concern over wether a proprietary app company will 'be around' (eg not gone out of business). At least with F/OSS, you have the source, and can contract seperately for support, whereas with a proprietary 'product' if the vendor goes belly-up, you are SOL.
How does burning grass pellets result in a fuel? It seems to me that it would result in burnt, used up grass pellets (eg, soot and ash).
Now perhaps grass pellets might *be* a clean, better fuel, but as far as I can tell burning them is the act of using that fuel, not the method of production of the fuel.
Id like to examine this demo document - but I didnt see any mention of it in the story or on their site - where is it/how do you get it?
It would be nice if /. would stop posting non-working links.
All I'd be happy about is if/when they couldnt/didnt advertise a price lower than that which they actually require someone to fork over to leave the store with the item.
Yes, Im not suggesting that you'd have any chance of getting out of there paying the lower price.
The point is to make a scene about it, let them and ever other customer within earshot know you feel deceived and are upset.
If they cant use rebates to advertised a 'lower (after rebate) price', then rebates arent of much use to the retailers/mfrs/etc either. The whole point was that they wanted to be able to advertise the lower price, catching the gullible folk, without really lowering the price.
If they find some other motivation to continue offering them, fine, as long as the price shown in big letters on the signs/ads/etc is the amount of cash you have to part with at the register before they will let you walk out with the item.
In two words - competition, and marketing. They *want* to advertise lower prices, to attract more customers. Basically this just means that (hopefully) they are voluntarily doing what I thought they should be forced to do - whatever price they advertise in large print *has* to be the amount they demand from you at the register, no more of this loaning them money and then waiting around for them to repay it to you. (without interest, and with the additional expense of time and usually postage on your part)
Yes, charging extra of paying with credit is prohibited. However, offering a 'cash discount' is not.
AFAIK most gas stations have stopped bothering with discriminatory pricing against credit cards anyway.
I beleive most state laws concerning sales tax require that the price shown be that *prior* to the tax being added, and I beleive there is a specific exception for measured products like gas pumps (since people often have exactly, (eg) $10 on them and run the pump until it gets to $10 - if tax was added after, they'd be stuck.
Also, the 9.99 instead of 10.00 has nothing to do with tax - and yes it is entirely a way to make it look like it costs less than it does, for those buyers who are incapable of rounding in there head. Just get used to thinking "$10" anytime you see "9.99"
And of course they like the people who pay the full "before rebate" price, and then never bother with the forms, or who give up after making no headway, etc.
Rebates have always been a way to lower the 'perceived' price (well, at least for the gullible) without really lowering the price.
If you want to sell your item based on a 39.95 price, why else would you demand on collecting $80 from me and force me to wait around to get $40 back? Why should *loan* you (retailer, manufacturer, whoever) $40 interest-free?
If you just changed the price to the intended 'after rebate' price, then you would have to worry about fraud, returns, etc. You wouldnt have the overhead of receiving money and then having to make sure you only gave it back to the 'right people'. In fact, if companies offering rebates can afford to pay a staff to process rebates, they must be making a bundle off people who never get their rebates, otherwise it wouldnt be cost effective.
I dont buy consumer electronics at retail all that often - but anytime I've considered doing so I've prety much figured the same way - However much cash I have to bring to the store is the price of the item.
In fact, I've always thought it would be entertaining, if a store advertised (eg) "39.95 (in huge print) - after $30 and $50 rebates (in tiny print)" to go to the store, bringing exactly 39.95 (plus enough for tax, etc) and take the item to the register, and hand them that amount at the check out, and when they wanted more, pointed out (very vocally and very angrily) that the price displayed was 39.95, not the higher amount, and then after they (presumably) refused to let me out the door paying only the "advertised" price, walked out the door leaving the item there, and making lots of noise about it as I did so - the whold point being to A. force them to deal with an unhappy (lost) customer, B. have to carry the item back and put it on the shelf again, and C. call as much attention to I could (both to the store, as well as any other customers at the registers, etc) that they had lost a sale over the stupidity.
I know its meant as an April fool, but this one is in really bad taste.
I dont want to. I expect to click on links in articles and have them go directly to the page that they imply that they intend to, without having to remember a special login for each site, without having to go thru a fifty question registration form to make a throwaway login each time, without having to cobble together special plugins, etc. In short, I expect WWW links to work they way that users of the WWW have expected them to all along.
/. would stop posting links that didnt lead to where the story implies they lead, or at the very least, tag those articles in a manner which makes it easy for those who share my expectations about links to just completely suppress them as if they didnt exist (which they might as well not, without any working link)
It would really be nice if
The link posted appears to be to some sort of sign up page, and not a news story. I for one would greatly appreciate if /. would stop posting links to sign up pages.
/. entries that include such (useless) links, and allow readers to set a preference to have all such entries suppresed.
If it absolutely must do so, then establish a flag that will be set for those
I generally find 'A+', and 'MCSE' to be 'anti-certifications'. Eg, someone who thought they could use a paper certification they get for $20 and taking a test that they memorized the answers to in place of actually knowing wtf they are doing. Plus most of them are usually MS-weiners anyway. The solution to all Windows problems is to *remove* Windows. The solution to all Windows virus problems is to *remove* the virus (which is Windows itself).
But other than that, yes this guy is something of an idiot.
Unless you are entirely inept, rolling in the dough, completely lazy, or some combination of all of the above, calling a 'mechanic, plumber, carpenter, or electrician' isnt always either desirable or feasible. Lots of people 'do their own' work in all of those areas. In fact lots of people *do* in fact build their own houses (some contract out large work such as excavation or pouring a foundation, but some do that on their own too).
So they really think that anyone smart enough to use VoIP for their 'terrorist communications' wouldnt be smart enough to use (encrypted) point-to-point SIP, instead of going thru a commercial VoIP-to-PSTN provider?
Im sure his tuituion bill, if itemized, would include an 'High speed Internet access' line item.
However, yes, it is their network, and their AUP can be anything they want it to be. But one would hope that they were not misinformed as to the (externally) legality of particular network protocols when making those decisions.
I suspect ADTI is more opposed to GPL software than they are to BSD-licensed. After all, they can freely steal from the latter. (Nothing against FreeBSD, I use it myself.)
"We are acknowledging that end users who merely open and read government documents that are saved as Office XML files within software programs will not violate the license."
Unless I've purchased software from MS, I'm not bound by any sort of license restrictions MS wants to impose on its customers, even assuming they even have the right to impose that restriction.
But of course, MS 'allowing' non-MS software to read its formats, and actually *documenting* the format so as to actually enable that, are two entirely different things.