It was the current government building on the work of the previous one that got the warring parties to the negotiating table. They didn't use any violence to achieve this aim and now Northern Ireland is largely peaceful. Yes the EU subsidies have gone a long way to remove the poverty of the province but it was a willingness to meet the terrorists and thrash out an agreement that ended their campaigns not bombing civilians as seems to be the standard response nowadays.
Unfortunately when one company has such a huge stranglehold on the market copying is the first way to erode their market share. IBM's hold on the mainframe market was first seriously challenged by Amdahl offering the same thing for less money, not by Unix and later on Windows.
The Gandhi analogy is a bit of a crap one since Gandhi actually won. You also might want to note that the British considered him a terrorist.
You can beat violence with non-violence, that's how the British government finally ended 30 years of Irishmen blowing up our cities.
Not by carpet bombing innocent civilians in Belfast (and creating new terrorists as a result) but by negotiating a compromise that now has a lot of bickering but very little violence.
And how many of those alternatives cost nothing. All of them except OS X which requires you to buy a new computer as well. Telling isn't it that not one payware competitor has even come close to challenging Microsoft's control of the desktop in all this time.
Is everyone that tried utterly incompetent at running a business? Is Microsoft so good that no-one can do it?
Or Is it that Microsoft control the protocols and have spent a great deal of time tying their customers exclusively to their platform ensuring that no-one who wants to carry on using their software is able to switch away from Windows.
People may have bought Windows initially for that reason but if they had the opportunity to move painlessly away from it tomorrow many would. Microsoft has, of course, made it very difficult for would-be competitors by per-cpu licensing and for companies who represented a threat by either buying the technology or by using illegal monopoly-maintenance tactics.
Lets face it, who would use Windows if there was any alternative, it's insecure (even with XP SP2), it's spyware and virus-prone due to poor design and its system requirements are ludicrous for what it is.
The lack of alternatives isn't due to a failure on the part of every start-up having no business sense, it's due to the predatory business practices of Microsoft.
No but she's the only one taking a fall for it which seems a tad unfair given that she was poorly trained and prolly working on a crappy piece of software without the necessary safeguards you would expect in a financial institution.
Which is indeed the case until you remember that one OS has a stranglehold on the market. Look at the alternatives to MS Office. What's the first thing they need to offer to stand a chance? Compatibility with the beast.
Microsoft did this themselves with their ability to read and write Lotus and guides to using Word if you're used to Wordperfect.
If there were 10 equal games in town instead of one Linux would already be shining; as it is it has to be compatible with the platform that the overwhelming majority of software only runs on.
The legal system doesn't work fine. The law should be applied equally regardless of status. The legal profession obviously costs too much, time to start training Indians in US law.
But then they're not doing anything wrong since they're there at the specific invitation of the owner. It's easy to tell people there's a flaw in their security without breaking in and tramping all over their data. If they don't listen, tough, but don't think sysadmin stupidity gives you carte blanche to make them look even more stupid. That just encourages them to press charges.
Funny how the century of the greatest human improvement also came in the era of the biggest governments. How did that happen when all government intervention is bad? Perhaps because the government intervention allowed ordinary people to get paid enough to buy homes, cars and many other consumer products that are the lifeblood of Western economies.
Do you really want to go back to people dying of preventable diseases and being injured in death trap factories just so you don't have to pay a fraction of your income? That's what 2 centuries of unfettered capitalism and a few millenia of the divine right of monarchs gave the human race.
Social democracy however gave us 100 years of incredibly rapid progress. Let's not turn it back just so a few can benefit.
Perhaps because we're concerned that pumping shit loads of crap into the atmosphere may just possibly have an impact. CFCs have already given us a hole in the ozone layer, saying climate change hasn't been proven doesn't mean we shouldn't moderate our behaviour somewhat in case it does. If nothing else, the air in our major cities will start to be breathable again.
Correct me if I'm wrong but science has proved a great many things, such as some germs cause disease (and which germs cause which disease) or that splitting an atom produces energy.
That's why both Sun and HP have been offering mainframe-class servers (their terminology not mine) for several years now. Mainframes have always made sense, that's why people still use them.
I am also a COBOL programmer whose 15 years experience is considered irrelevant because I don't have 2+ years experience in newer tech, despite my best efforts to get some.
These people are not just sitting around doing nothing while you pay them. Employees make you a lot more money than they cost you, because they do the work that brings in the money and keeps the business running.
Slashdot Mirror
Any follower of the teachings of Jesus Christ is a Christian. That's what the word means and no amount of wordplay is gonna change that.
It was the current government building on the work of the previous one that got the warring parties to the negotiating table. They didn't use any violence to achieve this aim and now Northern Ireland is largely peaceful. Yes the EU subsidies have gone a long way to remove the poverty of the province but it was a willingness to meet the terrorists and thrash out an agreement that ended their campaigns not bombing civilians as seems to be the standard response nowadays.
Unfortunately when one company has such a huge stranglehold on the market copying is the first way to erode their market share. IBM's hold on the mainframe market was first seriously challenged by Amdahl offering the same thing for less money, not by Unix and later on Windows.
The Gandhi analogy is a bit of a crap one since Gandhi actually won. You also might want to note that the British considered him a terrorist.
You can beat violence with non-violence, that's how the British government finally ended 30 years of Irishmen blowing up our cities.
Not by carpet bombing innocent civilians in Belfast (and creating new terrorists as a result) but by negotiating a compromise that now has a lot of bickering but very little violence.
And how many of those alternatives cost nothing. All of them except OS X which requires you to buy a new computer as well. Telling isn't it that not one payware competitor has even come close to challenging Microsoft's control of the desktop in all this time.
Is everyone that tried utterly incompetent at running a business? Is Microsoft so good that no-one can do it?
Or Is it that Microsoft control the protocols and have spent a great deal of time tying their customers exclusively to their platform ensuring that no-one who wants to carry on using their software is able to switch away from Windows.
People may have bought Windows initially for that reason but if they had the opportunity to move painlessly away from it tomorrow many would. Microsoft has, of course, made it very difficult for would-be competitors by per-cpu licensing and for companies who represented a threat by either buying the technology or by using illegal monopoly-maintenance tactics.
Lets face it, who would use Windows if there was any alternative, it's insecure (even with XP SP2), it's spyware and virus-prone due to poor design and its system requirements are ludicrous for what it is.
The lack of alternatives isn't due to a failure on the part of every start-up having no business sense, it's due to the predatory business practices of Microsoft.
No but she's the only one taking a fall for it which seems a tad unfair given that she was poorly trained and prolly working on a crappy piece of software without the necessary safeguards you would expect in a financial institution.
Yeh yeh Microsoft invented the desktop. If it wasn't for their brilliance we'd all be stuck with real crap like, I dunno, Apple Macs or Amigas
Which is indeed the case until you remember that one OS has a stranglehold on the market. Look at the alternatives to MS Office. What's the first thing they need to offer to stand a chance? Compatibility with the beast.
Microsoft did this themselves with their ability to read and write Lotus and guides to using Word if you're used to Wordperfect.
If there were 10 equal games in town instead of one Linux would already be shining; as it is it has to be compatible with the platform that the overwhelming majority of software only runs on.
The legal system doesn't work fine. The law should be applied equally regardless of status. The legal profession obviously costs too much, time to start training Indians in US law.
But then they're not doing anything wrong since they're there at the specific invitation of the owner. It's easy to tell people there's a flaw in their security without breaking in and tramping all over their data. If they don't listen, tough, but don't think sysadmin stupidity gives you carte blanche to make them look even more stupid. That just encourages them to press charges.
Funny how the century of the greatest human improvement also came in the era of the biggest governments. How did that happen when all government intervention is bad? Perhaps because the government intervention allowed ordinary people to get paid enough to buy homes, cars and many other consumer products that are the lifeblood of Western economies.
Do you really want to go back to people dying of preventable diseases and being injured in death trap factories just so you don't have to pay a fraction of your income? That's what 2 centuries of unfettered capitalism and a few millenia of the divine right of monarchs gave the human race.
Social democracy however gave us 100 years of incredibly rapid progress. Let's not turn it back just so a few can benefit.
Just as a matter of interest how would you observe something that travels faster than light?
Yep you can tell how badly the oil industry has suffered from such a law.
No he'd bitch at the PC vendor, since free tech support is only provided if you buy a box of Windows rather than it pre-installed.
Miguel D'Icaza
As long as they produce a superior product their profits are not in any danger. However they don't have a right to make a profit.
Perhaps because we're concerned that pumping shit loads of crap into the atmosphere may just possibly have an impact. CFCs have already given us a hole in the ozone layer, saying climate change hasn't been proven doesn't mean we shouldn't moderate our behaviour somewhat in case it does. If nothing else, the air in our major cities will start to be breathable again.
Correct me if I'm wrong but science has proved a great many things, such as some germs cause disease (and which germs cause which disease) or that splitting an atom produces energy.
In mainland Europe that's true, in 'Great' Britain we have a messy binge drinking culture that involves lots of fighting and property damage.
That's why both Sun and HP have been offering mainframe-class servers (their terminology not mine) for several years now. Mainframes have always made sense, that's why people still use them.
As opposed to the stereotypical grossly over-weight American?
Plenty of genocide in your history too.
I am also a COBOL programmer whose 15 years experience is considered irrelevant because I don't have 2+ years experience in newer tech, despite my best efforts to get some.
These people are not just sitting around doing nothing while you pay them. Employees make you a lot more money than they cost you, because they do the work that brings in the money and keeps the business running.