So you are saying that after their measures taken against Microsoft, another product was more able to compete fairly without unfair business practices?? i don't see your point.
DBesides, open source IN SOME WAYS is a response to monopolistic practices.
Actually I'm not changing the debate as much as you are ignoring an important fact that nullifies it in the first place; evolution is already applied as a science whereas creationism has yet to be.
Hence, that is why it is taught. Because it has been used to trace animal and plant roots (pun intended) to derive a genetic trail. This genetic trail furthers proves what you call a theory.
Theories which can be applied are no longer considered theories which explains why only creationists still consider it a theory and the scientific community as a whole has accepted it as fact.
Until another theory which can be applied equally well comes along, we accept this as fact.
So tell me how creationism has been applied to other areas of science. Explain to me how creationism has evolved other areas of science.
Until you can do that, creationism (or whatever you are calling it this week) is stil just a fairy tale. Science is based on proof. You provide that proof and I'll accept your fairy tale as fact.
How do you know you are not just a brain in a vat being fed eletric stimulus so that your entire reality is an illusion? In that sense, doesn't your reality become a theory?
It is no longer considered a theory because it is able to be scientifically applied. Evolution led to genetic advances being discovered through animal and plant ancestries. Had eviolution been 'just a theory', it would not be able to be applied so well.
But as such, it is applied daily and until this 'god theory' can have a bit more evidence (irony: proof denies faith), then creationism is nothing more than a fairy tale.
Science works through objective reasoning (or at least as objective as possible). This is how we achieve results in medicine, biology, chemistry, technology and more.
By immediately assuming there was a 'maker' and a 'grand design', you immediately fail to be objective and will pollute your scientific data with this opinion.
Creationists scientists are not the norm (in fact they are FAR from the norm) and that is because they must be objective. Scientists who are creationists cannot overcome their belief and should scientific data prove their belief incorrect, we can expect them to either warp the evidence to prove their point or blatantly disregard such evidence until they can find something that does prove their opinion.
Do you want you medicine created by people who would so casually disregard scientific evidence? Do you want your airplanes designed by these people? heart monitors? databases? etc.
Personally, I prefer someone who can be MORE objective and will accept the data results from the a well proven test than one who has to warp the test or the results to prove his personal beliefs.
In comparison to what? Open source applications that people can download and install for free? How do you compaere sales for something that isn't for sale?
Oh sure, you can compare it to Redhat but that doesn't give a good comparison as their are several distros that are free and installed for free; the same cannot be said about Microsoft. It's sales are it's ONLY determining factor for industry wide absorption.
But this is changing, it is the latest meme. Spreading through media, TV, radio, word of mouth. I have talked to technophobes who have switched merely because a friend did. I have even met a few moms who did.
Internet cafe's are disabling IE, businesses are switching to Firefox internally. It is spreading and people are waking up to the fact that there ARE choices.
And once they realize that there is another choice for their browser, they will also begin to wonder if there are other choices for their other products like the OS, Office apps, media players, etc.
Once the browser begins to fall (as it already has), people become aware that there are choices and once they are aware that there are choices, they will begin to make them.
Heh... when your mom, boss, coworker, friends, etc all feel the same, chances are it's not localized. When the media, the government and the industry are closing them out, chances are they aren't being well received.
False. Their sales are going down. They report that they have met quarter goals and in some divisions, sales are going up (X-box for instance but this is after declaring a loss for the last few years, it has still to make a profit over expenses).
When you say sales are going up, it's a trick of reporting that they declare this. Server sales are at a loss, XP sales are down, Office sales are down, etc. They had to cut employee insurance benefits and perks (such as free sodas and towels for the locker room ever so recently) in order to meet quarterly goals.
Check your stats across the boards in each of their divisions and you'll see what I mean. Sales are not up, profit is not up, their stock price has stagnated for the last 5 years.
Said (and implied) that they will lose... not disappear. There is a difference you know. After all, Enron is still in business, IBM is still in business, SUN is still in business and they all lost a major battle at one time or another.
The point that you are completely missing however is that they think they can win it.
They think they can convince consumers for the millionth time that they are secure, safe and that they still have the consumers interests at heart.
They think they can convince businesses that buying their software is alot better than getting better, safer, and more stable software for free.
They think they can convince countries that they are not a monopoly, that software patents have that countries best interests at heart and that open source initiatives at the government level will not save anyone money.
That's an awful lot of convincing that they have to do. I just wonder if their deep pockets will be able to support it when sales keep falling.
Keep in perspective the size of Microsoft's 'ship' that they have to turn around, the plethora of troubles that it has with it's products and add consumer/business discontent with open source and alternative software making HUGE instrides into their business.
They have a lawsuit, a competitor and an open source project at every door. And the company who stands to lose the most is MS.
They have themselves spread too thin, they have no focus (or their focus is on too much at once) and they have not followed through on consumer demands, industry standards or interoperability.
They have won in the past because they were able to spread money to a few key people. But this time, a few key people cannot keep them out of hot water. Consumers are pissed at them, businesses are pissed at them, governments are pissed at them and they are all beginning to work together and against them.
What can they do to stop this? Seriously.
I say they should start making their server side apps compatible with other systems, start getting out of server side and focus on desktop. It will be a long time before Linux takes over the desktop and if they put their focus back into the desktop, they will be able to cut their losses.
Not true. I'm talking consumers... period. Most consumers do not realize that their hardware can run anything other than Microsoft or that their is even an option other than Microsoft. These are consumers who have been burned not only by the browser but by the OS, Office or any other number of products made by Microsoft.
As a result, all fingers of blaim can only point in one direction as far as Joe Average is concerned and that's straight at Microsoft. They can pretty much blame everything on Microsoft due to Microsoft's attemopt to dominate all software on the desktop.
This is why it will be harder to turn this ship around from a PR perspective.
Very true in all regards. But the PR machine has to turn around ALL of Microsoft; the misgivings and bad karma associated with the browser is also associated with the company and ALL it's products. People who have been burned by the browser have more than likely also been burned by their tech support, their OS or another product.
So in the consumer or the businesses mind, the browser IS Microsoft, Microsoft IS the browser (and all things computer related).
Though they have turned their ship around before, it has never been this much of a behemoth and in so troubled waters.
Fixing those bugs will not show customers that their product is good. People now have the name Microsoft associated with insecurity. It took them only 8 years to update their browser and since then people have been screaming for support, better features, etc.
No... Microsoft burned quite a few bridges with alot of people and unless they can turn that PR machine around 180 degrees, people will continue to see them as bullies who are looking out for nobody but themselves.
Even if IE7 turns out to be the best product ever created by mortal man, people will immediately assume it sux (minus MS zealots of course).
They need to reinvent themselves in the eyes of the consumer, the business and world.
Lamp is Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP. The reason I point this out is because PHP used to be an Apache Foundation project and had built in MySQL support (hence the AMP). PHP is also the number one Apache module and therefore is often bundled WITH some Apache builds.
Python and Perl developers like to claim that the P in LAMP stands for Python and Perl (and it CAN) but it traditionally refers to PHP.
Really? What have they stole from Microsoft that Microsoft invented?? Just about everything Microsoft has done was done first by another company which they either bought out or out marketed.
And the sad fact is that it was usually done better before Microsoft put their grubby hands on it. The only thing Microsoft has been innovative on is good marketing... and Open Source is already kicking their ass at that as well.:)
Geezo! How many features from NIX systems are they going to integrate into their new OS? Why don't they just release their own Linux distro and face facts.
Slashdot Mirror
So you are saying that after their measures taken against Microsoft, another product was more able to compete fairly without unfair business practices?? i don't see your point.
DBesides, open source IN SOME WAYS is a response to monopolistic practices.
Actually I'm not changing the debate as much as you are ignoring an important fact that nullifies it in the first place; evolution is already applied as a science whereas creationism has yet to be.
Hence, that is why it is taught. Because it has been used to trace animal and plant roots (pun intended) to derive a genetic trail. This genetic trail furthers proves what you call a theory.
Theories which can be applied are no longer considered theories which explains why only creationists still consider it a theory and the scientific community as a whole has accepted it as fact.
Until another theory which can be applied equally well comes along, we accept this as fact.
So tell me how creationism has been applied to other areas of science. Explain to me how creationism has evolved other areas of science.
Until you can do that, creationism (or whatever you are calling it this week) is stil just a fairy tale. Science is based on proof. You provide that proof and I'll accept your fairy tale as fact.
How do you know you are not just a brain in a vat being fed eletric stimulus so that your entire reality is an illusion? In that sense, doesn't your reality become a theory?
It is no longer considered a theory because it is able to be scientifically applied. Evolution led to genetic advances being discovered through animal and plant ancestries. Had eviolution been 'just a theory', it would not be able to be applied so well.
But as such, it is applied daily and until this 'god theory' can have a bit more evidence (irony: proof denies faith), then creationism is nothing more than a fairy tale.
Science works through objective reasoning (or at least as objective as possible). This is how we achieve results in medicine, biology, chemistry, technology and more.
By immediately assuming there was a 'maker' and a 'grand design', you immediately fail to be objective and will pollute your scientific data with this opinion.
Creationists scientists are not the norm (in fact they are FAR from the norm) and that is because they must be objective. Scientists who are creationists cannot overcome their belief and should scientific data prove their belief incorrect, we can expect them to either warp the evidence to prove their point or blatantly disregard such evidence until they can find something that does prove their opinion.
Do you want you medicine created by people who would so casually disregard scientific evidence? Do you want your airplanes designed by these people? heart monitors? databases? etc.
Personally, I prefer someone who can be MORE objective and will accept the data results from the a well proven test than one who has to warp the test or the results to prove his personal beliefs.
propaganda=truth? oh I forgot, George Bush is still in office. Then yes, propaganda DOES equal truth. :)
Oddly enough, I feel the same about your opinion. :)
...and as if to prove my point just a few days later, Microsoft even says that their sales are down. http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/29/122023 0&tid=109&tid=187&tid=98&tid=1
now who are you going to believe?
In comparison to what? Open source applications that people can download and install for free? How do you compaere sales for something that isn't for sale?
Oh sure, you can compare it to Redhat but that doesn't give a good comparison as their are several distros that are free and installed for free; the same cannot be said about Microsoft. It's sales are it's ONLY determining factor for industry wide absorption.
But this is changing, it is the latest meme. Spreading through media, TV, radio, word of mouth. I have talked to technophobes who have switched merely because a friend did. I have even met a few moms who did.
Internet cafe's are disabling IE, businesses are switching to Firefox internally. It is spreading and people are waking up to the fact that there ARE choices.
And once they realize that there is another choice for their browser, they will also begin to wonder if there are other choices for their other products like the OS, Office apps, media players, etc.
Once the browser begins to fall (as it already has), people become aware that there are choices and once they are aware that there are choices, they will begin to make them.
Heh... when your mom, boss, coworker, friends, etc all feel the same, chances are it's not localized. When the media, the government and the industry are closing them out, chances are they aren't being well received.
Oooh an intellectual response. It's nice to know that Microsoft is still hiring the best and brightest. :)
False. Their sales are going down. They report that they have met quarter goals and in some divisions, sales are going up (X-box for instance but this is after declaring a loss for the last few years, it has still to make a profit over expenses).
When you say sales are going up, it's a trick of reporting that they declare this. Server sales are at a loss, XP sales are down, Office sales are down, etc. They had to cut employee insurance benefits and perks (such as free sodas and towels for the locker room ever so recently) in order to meet quarterly goals.
Check your stats across the boards in each of their divisions and you'll see what I mean. Sales are not up, profit is not up, their stock price has stagnated for the last 5 years.
Whine and complain? Nope... just going to call you a fucking bigot and be done with it. The Ku Klux Klan would be proud to have you as a member.
Said (and implied) that they will lose... not disappear. There is a difference you know. After all, Enron is still in business, IBM is still in business, SUN is still in business and they all lost a major battle at one time or another.
The point that you are completely missing however is that they think they can win it.
They think they can convince consumers for the millionth time that they are secure, safe and that they still have the consumers interests at heart.
They think they can convince businesses that buying their software is alot better than getting better, safer, and more stable software for free.
They think they can convince countries that they are not a monopoly, that software patents have that countries best interests at heart and that open source initiatives at the government level will not save anyone money.
That's an awful lot of convincing that they have to do. I just wonder if their deep pockets will be able to support it when sales keep falling.
Any pro-MS guy talking about memory bloat needs to paint his kettle a new color first before opening his mouth.
Keep in perspective the size of Microsoft's 'ship' that they have to turn around, the plethora of troubles that it has with it's products and add consumer/business discontent with open source and alternative software making HUGE instrides into their business.
They have a lawsuit, a competitor and an open source project at every door. And the company who stands to lose the most is MS.
They have themselves spread too thin, they have no focus (or their focus is on too much at once) and they have not followed through on consumer demands, industry standards or interoperability.
They have won in the past because they were able to spread money to a few key people. But this time, a few key people cannot keep them out of hot water. Consumers are pissed at them, businesses are pissed at them, governments are pissed at them and they are all beginning to work together and against them.
What can they do to stop this? Seriously.
I say they should start making their server side apps compatible with other systems, start getting out of server side and focus on desktop. It will be a long time before Linux takes over the desktop and if they put their focus back into the desktop, they will be able to cut their losses.
Not true. I'm talking consumers... period. Most consumers do not realize that their hardware can run anything other than Microsoft or that their is even an option other than Microsoft. These are consumers who have been burned not only by the browser but by the OS, Office or any other number of products made by Microsoft.
As a result, all fingers of blaim can only point in one direction as far as Joe Average is concerned and that's straight at Microsoft. They can pretty much blame everything on Microsoft due to Microsoft's attemopt to dominate all software on the desktop.
This is why it will be harder to turn this ship around from a PR perspective.
Very true in all regards. But the PR machine has to turn around ALL of Microsoft; the misgivings and bad karma associated with the browser is also associated with the company and ALL it's products. People who have been burned by the browser have more than likely also been burned by their tech support, their OS or another product.
So in the consumer or the businesses mind, the browser IS Microsoft, Microsoft IS the browser (and all things computer related).
Though they have turned their ship around before, it has never been this much of a behemoth and in so troubled waters.
Fixing those bugs will not show customers that their product is good. People now have the name Microsoft associated with insecurity. It took them only 8 years to update their browser and since then people have been screaming for support, better features, etc.
No... Microsoft burned quite a few bridges with alot of people and unless they can turn that PR machine around 180 degrees, people will continue to see them as bullies who are looking out for nobody but themselves.
Even if IE7 turns out to be the best product ever created by mortal man, people will immediately assume it sux (minus MS zealots of course).
They need to reinvent themselves in the eyes of the consumer, the business and world.
I'm talking about Microsoft of course.
Lamp is Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP. The reason I point this out is because PHP used to be an Apache Foundation project and had built in MySQL support (hence the AMP). PHP is also the number one Apache module and therefore is often bundled WITH some Apache builds.
Python and Perl developers like to claim that the P in LAMP stands for Python and Perl (and it CAN) but it traditionally refers to PHP.
Really? What have they stole from Microsoft that Microsoft invented?? Just about everything Microsoft has done was done first by another company which they either bought out or out marketed.
:)
And the sad fact is that it was usually done better before Microsoft put their grubby hands on it. The only thing Microsoft has been innovative on is good marketing... and Open Source is already kicking their ass at that as well.
Geezo! How many features from NIX systems are they going to integrate into their new OS? Why don't they just release their own Linux distro and face facts.
DAMN that 20 second wait! I can feel the karma burn coming already.
first post