"Yankee Group expects that other, equally significant changes will be in the offing for 2005," she said. "The fate of SCO is one of the big question marks. New management at Canopy . . . may push [SCO] to try and settle."
"Police say they arrested Bajaj because he violated India's Information Technology Act of 2000, which makes a criminal offense "publishing, transmitting, or causing to publish any information in electronic form, which is obscene."
Followed by a quote from an Indian government official saying that they need to re-examine this law because they "don't want to send the wrong message to foreign investors"
In other words, porn is big business and we surely don't want to scare people away.
I never said it should be an entitlement. Why did AOL hire them in the first place if they didn't need 950 employees?
This has been standard operating procedure in business for many years. Anytime a company has lots of money, whether it's from profits, VC money or a big IPO, they will hire hundreds, sometimes thousands, of people they really don't need.
Why?
A) Executive ego. It's more prestigious and gratifying to the ego to be in charge of 500 people rather than 50.
B) Executive laziness. The more people working for you, the less work you have to do yourself.
The failure of E-Books is another example of what happens when you spend all your time and energy trying to build restrictions into a product, instead of concentrating on making a good product at a fair price.
If you buy a computer from a small computer shop, what are the chances that the hard drive, CPU or other components are stolen or black market? Possible, but not very likely.
So why would they install a pirated copy of Windows? BECAUSE WINDOWS IS TOO F***ING EXPENSIVE! That's why.
Would somebody please smack Mr. Ballmer upside the head with the biggest clue stick available. The f***ing operating system costs twice as much as any other component in the computer!!
"People are discovering that when you buy any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really bought anything."
Exactly. After spending many thousands of dollars purcashing copies of Windows, Norton Systemworks, Photoshop and other programs over the years -- no more.
If a program requires 'activation' I either don't use it or get a cracked/warez copy. I'll be happy to go back to buying their software when they drop the stupid activation schemes.
What's wrong with the general public is they don't give a damn about computer security. Nor should they have to -- a computer is supposed to be a generic consumer product, usable by anyone. Unfortunately that's a long way from the truth. But I think you should blame the engineers and computer scientists, not the end users.
It's that attitude that's the problem. The computer IS NOT supposed to be a 'generic consumer product'. That's marketing bullshit. For years, companies that sell computers have been pushing the idea of the computer as an appliance. You don't need to know anything... you just push a button... just like your toaster.
User stupidity is still the number one security problem.
" The other possibility is that they only keep it free until they iron the bugs out."
A few years ago, I signed up with a company that advertised "free e-mail for life" and it included POP3 access. After a short time, only web-based access was free and POP3 required you to pay. I think that's exactly where Google is headed.
The argument of "Apache is widely used and is more secure than IIS, so you can't claim that Windows is attacked more simply because it's more widely used" is somewhat true, but misses a crucial point. Server software is not (usually) subjected to the same level of user stupiduty as desktop software.
Many of the 'security' problems in Windows are not just the result of sloppy programming by Microsoft. When you combine Microsoft's lack of attention to security with the stupidity of the average user, *THAT* is where the real problems start.
I have a few friends who have bought their first computers over that past couple of years and I would set them up with a firewall, tell them to buy an AV program and set up Mozilla for web browsing and e-mail, and tell them not to use IE. And within a few months I would be getting calls from them -- their computer is slow, it's crashing, etc....
And when I would investigate, I would find that their computers were full of garbage because they clicked on every piece of crapware that they came across. And their inbox is flooded with spam because they give their email address to every program and website that asks for it.
The hip-e is supposed to sell for $1699, isn't that the same or maybe even more than an iMac? So what's the point? The CEO's son wanted an iMac, so he designs something that costs more. That's real smart.
Once again, marketing drones fail to understand that 17 year olds are quite as stipud as you think they are, and when 40 year olds try to design for 17 year olds they often get it wrong.
"who discover that their computers, scanners or printers won't allow them to view or copy pictures of the new currency, due to mostly-secret anti-counterfeiting measures built-in."
Built in to what?
I just tried to scan a $20 bill with Photoshop 7 and it worked fine. Printed OK too (1 year old Epson printer)
"file sharing is a result of the industry's failure to meet the business models demanded by today's consumer"
This is true, but the music/movie/computer software industries are unable to grasp that concept. They are so consumed with greed, so consumed with an unquenchable thrist for more money -- even when they are already taking in record profits -- that they believe there is only one way to do business: An iron-fisted, totalitarian control of everything, in a world where there is no such thing as "fair use".
Their thinking is so clouded by a fog of greed that they can't even begin to grasp the idea that selling a good product at a fair price will bring in more money than all the lawsuits and copy protection schemes combined.
I'm a long time Mozilla user, but this is a silly non-issue.
If everyone in the world abandons IE for a different browser, the loss in revenue for Microsoft is exactly ZERO. Which explains why IE hasn't been updated/improved for years, because, if everyone in the world abandoned Mozilla, Opera, etc and switched to IE, the increase in revenue for Microsoft would be exactly ZERO.
and developing and mass producing a custom piece of hardware, even one based on off the shelf components, is pricey
Huh??
The only thing "custom" is the case. It takes some money to design and mass produce the case, but after that, it's just a matter of paying people to stuff standard off-the-self parts into it.
Extensions are a great idea - in theory. However, in reality there is a serious problem.
The Mozilla/Firefox developers keep changing basic structures in the program and as a result, each new release tends to break many themes/extensions. This problem is further compounded when the creator of an extension doesn't constantly release new versions of their extension (because they have a life, or just lost interest or whatever).
As a long time Mozilla user this is becoming quite annoying.
Slashdot Mirror
From our favorite SCO Shill Laura DiDio:
"Yankee Group expects that other, equally significant changes will be in the offing for 2005," she said. "The fate of SCO is one of the big question marks. New management at Canopy . . . may push [SCO] to try and settle."
SCO may try and settle? What a hoot.
From the MSNBC coverage of this story:
"Police say they arrested Bajaj because he violated India's Information Technology Act of 2000, which makes a criminal offense "publishing, transmitting, or causing to publish any information in electronic form, which is obscene."
Followed by a quote from an Indian government official saying that they need to re-examine this law because they "don't want to send the wrong message to foreign investors"
In other words, porn is big business and we surely don't want to scare people away.
Why?
A) Executive ego. It's more prestigious and gratifying to the ego to be in charge of 500 people rather than 50.
B) Executive laziness. The more people working for you, the less work you have to do yourself.
It shouldn't take 750 people to run the entire company, let alone having 750 extra people hanging around that they really don't need.
AOL management is as stupid as their users.
The failure of E-Books is another example of what happens when you spend all your time and energy trying to build restrictions into a product, instead of concentrating on making a good product at a fair price.
Sorry, but it has to be said.
Why are people pirating Windows when Linux is free?
If you buy a computer from a small computer shop, what are the chances that the hard drive, CPU or other components are stolen or black market? Possible, but not very likely.
So why would they install a pirated copy of Windows? BECAUSE WINDOWS IS TOO F***ING EXPENSIVE! That's why.
Would somebody please smack Mr. Ballmer upside the head with the biggest clue stick available. The f***ing operating system costs twice as much as any other component in the computer!!
If a program requires 'activation' I either don't use it or get a cracked/warez copy. I'll be happy to go back to buying their software when they drop the stupid activation schemes.
User stupidity is still the number one security problem.
I buy a car made by Ford.
Ford used a part that's patented by General Motors.
Can General Motors sue me for patent infringement?
Of course not. So how can Microsoft sue someone for using Linux?
If I buy Linux from Redhat, Suse or whatever, how can I be sued for patent infringement?
" The other possibility is that they only keep it free until they iron the bugs out."
A few years ago, I signed up with a company that advertised "free e-mail for life" and it included POP3 access. After a short time, only web-based access was free and POP3 required you to pay. I think that's exactly where Google is headed.
The argument of "Apache is widely used and is more secure than IIS, so you can't claim that Windows is attacked more simply because it's more widely used" is somewhat true, but misses a crucial point. Server software is not (usually) subjected to the same level of user stupiduty as desktop software.
Many of the 'security' problems in Windows are not just the result of sloppy programming by Microsoft. When you combine Microsoft's lack of attention to security with the stupidity of the average user, *THAT* is where the real problems start.
I have a few friends who have bought their first computers over that past couple of years and I would set them up with a firewall, tell them to buy an AV program and set up Mozilla for web browsing and e-mail, and tell them not to use IE. And within a few months I would be getting calls from them -- their computer is slow, it's crashing, etc....
And when I would investigate, I would find that their computers were full of garbage because they clicked on every piece of crapware that they came across. And their inbox is flooded with spam because they give their email address to every program and website that asks for it.
It's absolutely amazing that the head of one the biggest corporations can publcily say something so totally and utterly stupid.
The hip-e is supposed to sell for $1699, isn't that the same or maybe even more than an iMac? So what's the point? The CEO's son wanted an iMac, so he designs something that costs more. That's real smart.
Once again, marketing drones fail to understand that 17 year olds are quite as stipud as you think they are, and when 40 year olds try to design for 17 year olds they often get it wrong.
Up till now, I've been saying that Darl McBride isn't stupid, he's just crooked.
Their new website has proved me wrong.
"who discover that their computers, scanners or printers won't allow them to view or copy pictures of the new currency, due to mostly-secret anti-counterfeiting measures built-in."
Built in to what?
I just tried to scan a $20 bill with Photoshop 7 and it worked fine. Printed OK too (1 year old Epson printer)
So Longorn SP2 will fit on 2 disks!
In the category "Way too much free time on their hands"
"file sharing is a result of the industry's failure to meet the business models demanded by today's consumer"
This is true, but the music/movie/computer software industries are unable to grasp that concept. They are so consumed with greed, so consumed with an unquenchable thrist for more money -- even when they are already taking in record profits -- that they believe there is only one way to do business:
An iron-fisted, totalitarian control of everything, in a world where there is no such thing as "fair use".
Their thinking is so clouded by a fog of greed that they can't even begin to grasp the idea that selling a good product at a fair price will bring in more money than all the lawsuits and copy protection schemes combined.
Seriously. So what?
I'm a long time Mozilla user, but this is a silly non-issue.
If everyone in the world abandons IE for a different browser, the loss in revenue for Microsoft is exactly ZERO. Which explains why IE hasn't been updated/improved for years, because, if everyone in the world abandoned Mozilla, Opera, etc and switched to IE, the increase in revenue for Microsoft would be exactly ZERO.
This belongs under the definiton of "WAY WAY WAY too much free time on your hands" and "REALLY REALLY need to get a life".
Huh??
The only thing "custom" is the case. It takes some money to design and mass produce the case, but after that, it's just a matter of paying people to stuff standard off-the-self parts into it.
Extensions are a great idea - in theory. However, in reality there is a serious problem.
The Mozilla/Firefox developers keep changing basic structures in the program and as a result, each new release tends to break many themes/extensions. This problem is further compounded when the creator of an extension doesn't constantly release new versions of their extension (because they have a life, or just lost interest or whatever).
As a long time Mozilla user this is becoming quite annoying.
Now that they are 18, "Mary Kate and Ashley: American Pro Trucker Gang Bang"