Governments auction off radio spectrum. There should be auctions for domain names with the money going into the public coffers, rather than being free money for registrars.
Yeah, so no individual will be able to afford a 4 letter domain...
Because any smart business knows that the key to success is giving the customer what they want. In this case, Apple knows that a proportion of their customer base and potential customer base would like to be able to boot into Windows. Letting them do so easily has the potential to sell more boxes, full stop.
Exactly, and at their price-points, they are making out like bandits.
I wonder if what happened was that they saw a big boost in sales after the news broke of the "unofficial way" to run XP on Intel based Macs. Their strategy could have easily been to hold off on this until someone else proofed that there's value in it.
Since when has having remedial level math skills considered "insightful"?
Hehe, since when has having mediocre reading skills been considered "interesting"?
The OP said "If even 5% succeed in making an IPO worth 10 fold the investor's buy-in price".
He doesn't say that those not making IPO are 100% loss, in fact he doesn't even say that the other 95% are NOT making IPO.
Instead of your interpretation of the other 95% being a total loss, you could complete his sentence like this: "If even 5% succeed in making an IPO worth 10 fold the investor's buy-in price, and the other 95% succeed in making an IPO worth 9.99 fold the investor's buy-in price...".
All I'm saying is if you want to get pedantic, be prepared for getting shit flung back at you.
(and now you all can complain about my bad spelling, or something).
They are 10 years late and investigating the wrong medium. I don't see anything wrong with 99 cents per song, my issues were the $21 for a CD with one decent song.
I do see something wrong with $0.99/song. I happen to like to get the entire album. I don't thing I've ever paid $21 for a CD. Maybe $17 at the most. But on average I'd say $14.-
So that bottoms out at about nearly the same price. What I don't understand is why the music industry believes that they can pocket all the money when selling a product that [1] is inferior in sound quality (unless iTunes sells lossless compression now, I've done a-b tests and I think most people will be able to hear the difference in quality on a high-end audio system) [2] is inferior in flexibility (original CDs didn't have any form of DRM) [3] is less complete (where's the booklet with lyrics?) [4] requires special software to purchase/playback and finally [5] costs them a LOT less to distribute.
The last one is really the kicker. I _know_ what distribution and production of media costs, and it's pretty clear that the music industry is behaving like a bunch of greedy bastards. If they are lucky they'll get 50% of what you pay for a CD after the cost of distribution, production and storage. Yet when they sell stuff online they want to pick up 100% of what normally goes to third parties. In other words, if I pay $10 for a CD, about half (or more) goes to the cost of media (CD, case & booklet), distribution, storage and retail cost. All this is pretty much replaced by a simple website and server, which will cost peanuts on a per-download basis. So the music industry wants to absorb all of the $5 or whatever that was saved by going online.
I guess that's fine with me. I won't download music illegaly. But I won't buy it either. If I _really_ want something, I'll get a CD. Give me reasonable prices for a reasonable product and we'll talk. Don't come bitching about sales going down and quit your fucking government manipulation.
The bands that are taking things in their own hands and realizing that recording and distributing online is something they can finance themselves should be applauded and supported in any way possible.
Controlled tests (where subjects are directed to steal an object) are very different than real world scenarios.
Absolutely. It's an interesting predicament. I would think that testing the reliability is a major pain in the ass. If you take real liars, then how do you know how accurately they respond to the question "was the detector correct?". Or if you tell them in advance what to do, how do you know that they really did it?
I mean seriously, the subject would have to be a genuine liar, or how the hell are you going to know if the device works. But how can you be sure someone is a genuine liar? Maybe they're just lying about the fact that they lied?
We were once presented with this puzzle; two brothers live on a T junction. One of them is a liar, the other one isn't. You are lost and arrive at the junction. You have to go either left or right. If you take the wrong direction you'll get lost in the swamps and get eaten by an alligator. The other direction leads you home. So here are the two brothers, you get to ask one of them one question to determine where to go. What is your question.
The answer is fairly simple, but what always pissed me off about it is that it's based on the assumption that liars _always_ lie.
Of course this is all very theoretical, but after you see people starting to believe their own lies, you gotta think this is a pretty complicated matter.
The Constitution does not say "these are the things people get to do." It says "These are the things that the Government is not allowed to do."
Excuse my ignorance as I'm not a US citizen, but doesn't the costitution say things like "freedom of speech" and "the right to bear arms"? Aren't those specific rights given to the people? I know they are amendments, but it still part of the constitution, right?
This is what made me lose respect for Google - the fact that their so-called-values disappear at the first sign of money.
Yeah, or at the first sign of a massive lawsuit by their shareholders, maybe?
You guys are very naive; what the hell did you expect? Google is a public company. Their goal is to maximize profit for their shareholders. Cutting off a major revenue stream is the kind of thing that shareholders get huffy about.
Your expectations of Google have been unreasonable.
On the other hand, Google tries to project the image of being Oh-so-Good
See, I think you (and many others) are trying to project something onto Google what they are not. I'm an average Google user, and I don't really get that image. You guys keep talking about the "Do no evil" thing. It's only the 6th item on their 10 commandments. I don't see it plastered over the home page. I actually find 4. Democracy on the web works. a lot more ironic btw.
This is a good thing though. Hopefully now the fan-boys will pipe down a bit and realize that Google is just another company that we shouldn't trust more or less than any other company.
Btw. I'm not making any judgment on whether their course of action is the right one. I think censorship in another country is a complex issue and before you form an opinion requires a fair bit of research. (I imagine all the people on slashdot that have such strong opinions have done _their_ homework).
In general though, I'm very much against companies getting involved in politics. They should just obey the laws and leave politics to individuals. If China's censorship is so bad, then there should be a boycott. Of course that would really cut down on the luxury that people in the Western world can afford. So if you can benefit from Chinese labor, why can't Google benefit too? Just a thought.
[price of Pixar was $7.4 billion with a b dollars]
Thats a lot but it may have been interesting to say it was in Disney stock.
To put it in perspective, that's about tripple the amount eBay paid for Skype. Doesn't seem like a lot to me, given that whatever Skype is doing is something that's easily reproducible. It would be a lot harder to find the body of talent that Pixar employs.
I think the question ought to be "when do you START support for software".
Because the answer is, "When you can afford to".
It's all nice and good, but for a small organization with limited resources it doesn't make sense to take the extra effort to support Lynx, when 99.9% of your potential customers are going to be on the top 2.
From a business perspective it makes absolutely no sense to spend money on that. Then as you grow bigger and you are less resource limited, you can start being a "nice" citizen.
After all, what good is your website going to be if you have to abandon it after you spent all your money on making the website viewable by 100% of the people instead of on things that make better business sence.
Additionally, you have to keep in mind also that even though you can look at server logs and see what percentage of hits were by a certain browser; most people will have access to multiple machines, and if your website is interesting enough, even though they can't get to it with Lynx, they will probably get around to looking at it with Firefox at some point.
So here's a friendly recommendation: not about posting articles, but about posting comments.
When you are replying to a comment, it really helps when you quote what you are replying to. For example, for people like myself that read at +5 Threaded, your comment appears out of context. Because at this particular time, the post you are replying to is hidden to me since it's moderated at +3.
Hey, it's your site, you can do whatever you want. Some of us bitch, but we still come back here because we like it so much.:-) Just keep up the good work!
(in this case I'm not really replying to anything specific, so I guess, there's nothing to quote...)
Yeah, I have had a couple of those for a few months now.
In general I'm fairly happy with em, installation was straightforward and they do their job.
Supposedly the drives of the Buffalo Stations are a bitch to remove in times of failure. It's certainly not a big deal with these.
BUT, there are some not so good sides to these boxes: - the datarate flat-out sucks. There's no need for Gigabit Ethernet. I've never gotten anything that would saturate 100Mb/s Ethernet even. - they are pretty loud, even though they have the fancy fans. - maybe this is normal for RAID-5 but boy does it take a while to initialize the disks. - really pretty expensive. For $600 you can get a lot of PC. Almost all will have 4 IDE interfaces (maybe not all SATA). The only drawback is that this option would take a lot more time to setup.
What we need is a Linux RAID-5 distro. Installable on your run of the mill PC. Actually, it would be even better if it just booted from USB (or even CD/DVD for that matter), so there's no dependency on the harddrives and a failure wouldn't compromise the OS. Some standard services like SMB/NFS/FTP and Web configurability of those services, and you're pretty much there.
... or a misunderstanding. 1 MHz is currently in use by terrestrial AM broadcasters.
They are talking about the width, not the center frequency. So a 1 MHz wide band. I don't know what frequency at exactly, but likely in the 800-900MHz range.
And despite the fact that the MPEG-2 encryption was a rush job and has long since been blown away by newer codecs
I'm sure you meant MPEG-2 compression, not encryption. MPEG-2 compression was certainly NOT a rush job. I agree that there are better codecs now. MPEG-2 has simply been one step in the evolution, and a significant amount of effort went into the development.
Or maybe you are confusing CSS encryption that is used on DVDs with MPEG-2. CSS encryption was evidently a rush job. Which is probably more of a reason than anything else why the movie industry wants to see it dead. Video quality isn't really the issue yet (even today very few TVs display native 1080p movies to begin with).
Keeping in mind that the title is "10 Greatest Gadget Ideas of the Year", you'd have to conclude this really was a terribly lame year. Let's go down the list:
1) [folding memory card] How about digital cameras taking USB memory sticks directly (I understand this would require a new physical spec, but wouldn't that make a lot more sense?)
2) [VM VCR] It would be nice if the link pointed to a Treo 700W. I agree that VM should appear like email with VCR like controls on a mobile device. But this is not a device I can go and buy today...
3) [front side TV connectors] Don't know what he's talking about; I've had front interfaces on my TV for years, but there must be something more to see for people that care to register.
4) [increased video resolution on digital cameras] Increased resolution is hardly a gadget idea, it's just an incremental improvement, as one might expect (after several years I might add). Fair enough 1024 is a pretty nice jump.
5) [downloadable video] We'll see how this _really_ pans out. It certainly isn't a bright or clever idea, it's all about (biz) politics.
6) [outer button flip-phone] Come freaking on. A bad UI design has been corrected.
7) [free domain name] Seriously. (a) who doesn't have $8/year to register the domain with registerfly or something and get a advertisement-free domain (b) is this really something new? I can hardly believe it.
8) [modular DVD screen] This is not a smart idea. If it hasn't been done before it is because it's just not going to last. Either the LCD is going to have to support a wild range of interfaces (VGA, S-Video, DVI etc etc) and hence would become much larger then it needs to be if it were driven directly by the hardware (direct digital). Or it could support just analog video say. Now the quality suck. So it could support just VGA. Now the driving logic in the devices needs to add VGA output. Well, it's just not going to happen. You're going to be buying this stuff from one vendor because it sounds great, and a year from now half of it won't work and the vendor has discontinued the idea.
9) [family portrait burst-mode] Let's grab the quote: the odds of somebody's eyes being closed increases geometrically with the number of people in the group. (emphasis mine). That's a hoot. But, sure I understand the problem. My camera from 2003 let's me take a bunch of pictures in a row. It's not a 2005 idea.
10) [HD tape] I guess... A great gadget because they DIDN'T change the physical format.
Very disappointing list to me. Surely there were better tech advancements than just this!
As we speak, I am looking for my copy of Daemon Tools on my computer, but I can't find it because it's named in the start menu by the software's manufacturer, not the name of the program.
What you are talking about is a true problem (although most installers allow you to change the name). But in the case of Daemon tools??? I installed the latest version recently and it's under "DAEMON Tools". I don't know what other name it goes by, but the domain name is "daemon-tools.cc" and their website talks about "Daemon" or "Daemon tools" predominantely, so I doubt it's listed under "Jelsoft Enterprises". You probably took a bad example.
Slashdot Mirror
If someone doesn't know what TCP/IP means or what a CNAME record is, I can direct him to appropriate RFCs that define them.
... I'm getting tired.
Bandwidth, Function, Procedure, Assembly, Object Oriented, Dynamic HTML, Reboot, BIOS, OS, Real-time, Hard-real-time, Connectivity, Java Beans, Data Mining, Scrubbing, Reflection, Spurious Interrupt, VRAM, I/O Constrained, Memory Leak, Cache Latency, Burst Mode, Jiffies, Extreme Programming, Double Buffering, Asynchronous, Isynchronous, Thrashing
Governments auction off radio spectrum. There should be auctions for domain names with the money going into the public coffers, rather than being free money for registrars.
Yeah, so no individual will be able to afford a 4 letter domain...
It even runs X, python, gcc
;-)
Heh, I bet Joe $100 Laptop is going to be really interested in that.
Actually not a bad idea; just provide a box that only has compilers. "You want to browse the web? Better start coding!"
Who knows what great programs might role out of that.
Because any smart business knows that the key to success is giving the customer what they want. In this case, Apple knows that a proportion of their customer base and potential customer base would like to be able to boot into Windows. Letting them do so easily has the potential to sell more boxes, full stop.
Exactly, and at their price-points, they are making out like bandits.
I wonder if what happened was that they saw a big boost in sales after the news broke of the "unofficial way" to run XP on Intel based Macs. Their strategy could have easily been to hold off on this until someone else proofed that there's value in it.
:-) Yeah, the summary probably forgot to mention something:
reports of the site earning over $10,000/day in Adsense revenues on days the site hits Slashdot's frontpage.
Since when has having remedial level math skills considered "insightful"?
...".
Hehe, since when has having mediocre reading skills been considered "interesting"?
The OP said "If even 5% succeed in making an IPO worth 10 fold the investor's buy-in price".
He doesn't say that those not making IPO are 100% loss, in fact he doesn't even say that the other 95% are NOT making IPO.
Instead of your interpretation of the other 95% being a total loss, you could complete his sentence like this: "If even 5% succeed in making an IPO worth 10 fold the investor's buy-in price, and the other 95% succeed in making an IPO worth 9.99 fold the investor's buy-in price
All I'm saying is if you want to get pedantic, be prepared for getting shit flung back at you.
(and now you all can complain about my bad spelling, or something).
<'.$tag.'><![CDATA['.$value.']]></'.$tag.'>';
What if $value contains a ']' ?
That's what things like Truecrypt are for.
Of course the majority of people will not use this and happily hand over all their private information...
They are 10 years late and investigating the wrong medium. I don't see anything wrong with 99 cents per song, my issues were the $21 for a CD with one decent song.
I do see something wrong with $0.99/song. I happen to like to get the entire album. I don't thing I've ever paid $21 for a CD. Maybe $17 at the most. But on average I'd say $14.-
So that bottoms out at about nearly the same price. What I don't understand is why the music industry believes that they can pocket all the money when selling a product that [1] is inferior in sound quality (unless iTunes sells lossless compression now, I've done a-b tests and I think most people will be able to hear the difference in quality on a high-end audio system) [2] is inferior in flexibility (original CDs didn't have any form of DRM) [3] is less complete (where's the booklet with lyrics?) [4] requires special software to purchase/playback and finally [5] costs them a LOT less to distribute.
The last one is really the kicker. I _know_ what distribution and production of media costs, and it's pretty clear that the music industry is behaving like a bunch of greedy bastards. If they are lucky they'll get 50% of what you pay for a CD after the cost of distribution, production and storage. Yet when they sell stuff online they want to pick up 100% of what normally goes to third parties. In other words, if I pay $10 for a CD, about half (or more) goes to the cost of media (CD, case & booklet), distribution, storage and retail cost. All this is pretty much replaced by a simple website and server, which will cost peanuts on a per-download basis. So the music industry wants to absorb all of the $5 or whatever that was saved by going online.
I guess that's fine with me. I won't download music illegaly. But I won't buy it either. If I _really_ want something, I'll get a CD. Give me reasonable prices for a reasonable product and we'll talk. Don't come bitching about sales going down and quit your fucking government manipulation.
The bands that are taking things in their own hands and realizing that recording and distributing online is something they can finance themselves should be applauded and supported in any way possible.
Controlled tests (where subjects are directed to steal an object) are very different than real world scenarios.
Absolutely. It's an interesting predicament. I would think that testing the reliability is a major pain in the ass. If you take real liars, then how do you know how accurately they respond to the question "was the detector correct?". Or if you tell them in advance what to do, how do you know that they really did it?
I mean seriously, the subject would have to be a genuine liar, or how the hell are you going to know if the device works. But how can you be sure someone is a genuine liar? Maybe they're just lying about the fact that they lied?
We were once presented with this puzzle; two brothers live on a T junction. One of them is a liar, the other one isn't. You are lost and arrive at the junction. You have to go either left or right. If you take the wrong direction you'll get lost in the swamps and get eaten by an alligator. The other direction leads you home. So here are the two brothers, you get to ask one of them one question to determine where to go. What is your question.
The answer is fairly simple, but what always pissed me off about it is that it's based on the assumption that liars _always_ lie.
Of course this is all very theoretical, but after you see people starting to believe their own lies, you gotta think this is a pretty complicated matter.
The Constitution does not say "these are the things people get to do." It says "These are the things that the Government is not allowed to do."
Excuse my ignorance as I'm not a US citizen, but doesn't the costitution say things like "freedom of speech" and "the right to bear arms"? Aren't those specific rights given to the people? I know they are amendments, but it still part of the constitution, right?
Maybe I misunderstand...
This is what made me lose respect for Google - the fact that their so-called-values disappear at the first sign of money.
Yeah, or at the first sign of a massive lawsuit by their shareholders, maybe?
You guys are very naive; what the hell did you expect? Google is a public company. Their goal is to maximize profit for their shareholders. Cutting off a major revenue stream is the kind of thing that shareholders get huffy about.
Your expectations of Google have been unreasonable.
On the other hand, Google tries to project the image of being Oh-so-Good
See, I think you (and many others) are trying to project something onto Google what they are not. I'm an average Google user, and I don't really get that image. You guys keep talking about the "Do no evil" thing. It's only the 6th item on their 10 commandments. I don't see it plastered over the home page. I actually find 4. Democracy on the web works. a lot more ironic btw.
This is a good thing though. Hopefully now the fan-boys will pipe down a bit and realize that Google is just another company that we shouldn't trust more or less than any other company.
Btw. I'm not making any judgment on whether their course of action is the right one. I think censorship in another country is a complex issue and before you form an opinion requires a fair bit of research. (I imagine all the people on slashdot that have such strong opinions have done _their_ homework).
In general though, I'm very much against companies getting involved in politics. They should just obey the laws and leave politics to individuals. If China's censorship is so bad, then there should be a boycott. Of course that would really cut down on the luxury that people in the Western world can afford. So if you can benefit from Chinese labor, why can't Google benefit too? Just a thought.
[price of Pixar was $7.4 billion with a b dollars]
Thats a lot but it may have been interesting to say it was in Disney stock.
To put it in perspective, that's about tripple the amount eBay paid for Skype. Doesn't seem like a lot to me, given that whatever Skype is doing is something that's easily reproducible. It would be a lot harder to find the body of talent that Pixar employs.
Yeah, you mean how "the jobs Amazon's brought to rural areas don't exactly scream financial success."
doesn't _exactly_ match up with the article: "Everybody is really happy with their business," he said. "It's a good economy booster."
Beats the hell out of me...
I think the question ought to be "when do you START support for software".
Because the answer is, "When you can afford to".
It's all nice and good, but for a small organization with limited resources it doesn't make sense to take the extra effort to support Lynx, when 99.9% of your potential customers are going to be on the top 2.
From a business perspective it makes absolutely no sense to spend money on that. Then as you grow bigger and you are less resource limited, you can start being a "nice" citizen.
After all, what good is your website going to be if you have to abandon it after you spent all your money on making the website viewable by 100% of the people instead of on things that make better business sence.
Additionally, you have to keep in mind also that even though you can look at server logs and see what percentage of hits were by a certain browser; most people will have access to multiple machines, and if your website is interesting enough, even though they can't get to it with Lynx, they will probably get around to looking at it with Firefox at some point.
So here's a friendly recommendation: not about posting articles, but about posting comments.
:-) Just keep up the good work!
When you are replying to a comment, it really helps when you quote what you are replying to. For example, for people like myself that read at +5 Threaded, your comment appears out of context. Because at this particular time, the post you are replying to is hidden to me since it's moderated at +3.
Hey, it's your site, you can do whatever you want. Some of us bitch, but we still come back here because we like it so much.
(in this case I'm not really replying to anything specific, so I guess, there's nothing to quote...)
Dark Energy May Be Changing
For subscribers only
Yeah, I have had a couple of those for a few months now.
In general I'm fairly happy with em, installation was straightforward and they do their job.
Supposedly the drives of the Buffalo Stations are a bitch to remove in times of failure. It's certainly not a big deal with these.
BUT, there are some not so good sides to these boxes:
- the datarate flat-out sucks. There's no need for Gigabit Ethernet. I've never gotten anything that would saturate 100Mb/s Ethernet even.
- they are pretty loud, even though they have the fancy fans.
- maybe this is normal for RAID-5 but boy does it take a while to initialize the disks.
- really pretty expensive. For $600 you can get a lot of PC. Almost all will have 4 IDE interfaces (maybe not all SATA). The only drawback is that this option would take a lot more time to setup.
What we need is a Linux RAID-5 distro. Installable on your run of the mill PC. Actually, it would be even better if it just booted from USB (or even CD/DVD for that matter), so there's no dependency on the harddrives and a failure wouldn't compromise the OS. Some standard services like SMB/NFS/FTP and Web configurability of those services, and you're pretty much there.
... or a misunderstanding. 1 MHz is currently in use by terrestrial AM broadcasters.
They are talking about the width, not the center frequency. So a 1 MHz wide band. I don't know what frequency at exactly, but likely in the 800-900MHz range.
Most Windows computers at one point have connected to Windows Update
Uhmm, yeah, but what exactly would they need a backdoor for, if people already willingly allow an ActiveX component to run Windows update?
I would say that Windows Update is the proof that Microsoft does NOT need a backdoor, they have a frontdoor already.
(but you are correct that most Windows boxen do on a regular basis visit MS websites).
If Google DRM runs on Linux, I will back it.
Good point. Who wouldn't give up a bit of constitution if it's a mix of Google & Linux?
And despite the fact that the MPEG-2 encryption was a rush job and has long since been blown away by newer codecs
I'm sure you meant MPEG-2 compression, not encryption. MPEG-2 compression was certainly NOT a rush job. I agree that there are better codecs now. MPEG-2 has simply been one step in the evolution, and a significant amount of effort went into the development.
Or maybe you are confusing CSS encryption that is used on DVDs with MPEG-2. CSS encryption was evidently a rush job. Which is probably more of a reason than anything else why the movie industry wants to see it dead. Video quality isn't really the issue yet (even today very few TVs display native 1080p movies to begin with).
I can't get over the deep irony of the gay rights group discriminating against you.
Hey Alanis, is that you?
Keeping in mind that the title is "10 Greatest Gadget Ideas of the Year", you'd have to conclude this really was a terribly lame year. Let's go down the list:
1) [folding memory card] How about digital cameras taking USB memory sticks directly (I understand this would require a new physical spec, but wouldn't that make a lot more sense?)
2) [VM VCR] It would be nice if the link pointed to a Treo 700W. I agree that VM should appear like email with VCR like controls on a mobile device. But this is not a device I can go and buy today...
3) [front side TV connectors] Don't know what he's talking about; I've had front interfaces on my TV for years, but there must be something more to see for people that care to register.
4) [increased video resolution on digital cameras] Increased resolution is hardly a gadget idea, it's just an incremental improvement, as one might expect (after several years I might add). Fair enough 1024 is a pretty nice jump.
5) [downloadable video] We'll see how this _really_ pans out. It certainly isn't a bright or clever idea, it's all about (biz) politics.
6) [outer button flip-phone] Come freaking on. A bad UI design has been corrected.
7) [free domain name] Seriously. (a) who doesn't have $8/year to register the domain with registerfly or something and get a advertisement-free domain (b) is this really something new? I can hardly believe it.
8) [modular DVD screen] This is not a smart idea. If it hasn't been done before it is because it's just not going to last. Either the LCD is going to have to support a wild range of interfaces (VGA, S-Video, DVI etc etc) and hence would become much larger then it needs to be if it were driven directly by the hardware (direct digital). Or it could support just analog video say. Now the quality suck. So it could support just VGA. Now the driving logic in the devices needs to add VGA output. Well, it's just not going to happen. You're going to be buying this stuff from one vendor because it sounds great, and a year from now half of it won't work and the vendor has discontinued the idea.
9) [family portrait burst-mode] Let's grab the quote: the odds of somebody's eyes being closed increases geometrically with the number of people in the group. (emphasis mine). That's a hoot. But, sure I understand the problem. My camera from 2003 let's me take a bunch of pictures in a row. It's not a 2005 idea.
10) [HD tape] I guess... A great gadget because they DIDN'T change the physical format.
Very disappointing list to me. Surely there were better tech advancements than just this!
As we speak, I am looking for my copy of Daemon Tools on my computer, but I can't find it because it's named in the start menu by the software's manufacturer, not the name of the program.
What you are talking about is a true problem (although most installers allow you to change the name). But in the case of Daemon tools??? I installed the latest version recently and it's under "DAEMON Tools". I don't know what other name it goes by, but the domain name is "daemon-tools.cc" and their website talks about "Daemon" or "Daemon tools" predominantely, so I doubt it's listed under "Jelsoft Enterprises". You probably took a bad example.