Could you name more than one? Britain is the only one I know of, every other country I've been in the porno mags are in the same place as all the other ones in the newsagents.
Macintosh and Linux are not competition since they cannot run even a fraction of the Windows software out there. Ever heard of the phrase 'applications barrier to entry'. The reason that no serious competitor has emerged to challenge Microsoft on the desktop is because they cannot compete against the entrenched monopoly that holds all the cards. No amount of childish abuse will change that fact. I will concede that IE does [b]now[/b] pop up a box asking you if you want to install it. That has only been the case for a year. Blaming the users anyway is a pathetic cop out, would MS be able to get away with it on a level playing field? Of course they wouldn't.
And if Microsoft had competition in their marketplace? Would Windows be better or worse. Blaming the user for the flaws in Windows is an appalling argument. How the hell would a user know that their web browser could download malicious software silently. That idiotic functionality is built-in to IE and it shouldn't be. It's always the same arguments from MS apologists: it's the user's fault (but it's supposed to be easy to use); it's buggy drivers (so what's the HAL for?); oh you're just a communist et al. Apple don't have a monopoly on online music, there are plenty of others about that you can use. However with even basic clerical jobs needing computer literacy and just about everything only running on Windows what other supplier can I go to? Linux is great but I can't run everything I want to on it. Apple might be cool but I'm not buying another computer for it. *BSD? Same problem as Linux. People buy Windows because there's nothing else, due to the illegal (as declared in both US and EU courts) abuse of their monopoly position, and because it comes preloaded on their PCs. If there were alternatives that were practical Microsoft's only business advantage would melt away.
If he had obtained that money in a reasonably honest way and by producing the best product we'd be all over him. As it is he was handed a monopoly by IBM and has illegally defended said monopoly whilst producing sub-standard products that would have died in a competitive market. The antipathy I have towards Bill Gates is having to clean up his mess on my non-technical friends' and family's PCs because crushing the competition and fancy marketing was more important than making a decent product. So whilst it's great that he donates to charity let's not forget that he obtained his fortune illegally.
More than there should be but not as many as you imply. On the other hand I have worked with some true genuises who can take whatever language and platform and make beautiful music. However I have only twice in 15 years in the industry worked for a manager with a clue, the rest being buzzword-spouting rubber stamps and/or bullies.
Unless they happen to be running something that is a threat to the MS monopoly, i.e. VMWare, and then they get seriously stung. This is another power play from MS dressed up as doing customers a favour.
So why not get liability insurance? This article is not an attack on FOSS anyway it's an attack on the incompetent commercial sector who have zero excuse for the poor quality of their code.
I'm confused by this whole argument. Developers defending the poor practices of IT management. When you have unrealistic deadlines, poorly thought out and constantly changing requirements and programmers working 60+ hours a week, you will get shit code. The problem with IT is at the top. The head of accounts in corporation is an accountant, the head of the legal department is a lawyer, but the head of IT could be just about anyone.
You have a point about Germany, however France as a country has existed for a lot longer than the US, irrespective of whether it had a constitution or not. Without France the US may not have existed but then you Yanks find it convenient to forget this just because they wouldn't kiss your ass over the unnecessary war in Iraq.
Aye I thought I'd mention it as a reason for not using it as much (although I'm currently replying in it now;)). FF has been a bit horrible since about 1.02 and if websites designers made more effort to support the three main browsers then FF would be uninstalled in short order. How damn cool is the voice control:)
Yes which is why I don't, I pay for my downloads if I do them which is rarely since I don't see why Apple/Napster or the record companies get to say what I do with that file as long as I don't use it illegally. I will pay £0.99 for an mp3 quite happily, I will very rarely and very grudgingly pay £0.99 for a DRM-crippled song. That is my objection to the record companies' heavy-handedness. I'm not a criminal, I'm a customer and as such should be treated as someone who pays their wages.
I think Opera is quicker but doesn't work as well (or at all) with some websites as Firefox even when identifying itself as IE or Netscape. That isn't Opera's fault but it is irritating which is why I don't use it as much as FF (I very very rarely come across a website that only works in IE these days before you say anything).
Slashdot Mirror
Gas would be cheaper for you if you didn't drive an absurd gas guzzler.
Could you name more than one? Britain is the only one I know of, every other country I've been in the porno mags are in the same place as all the other ones in the newsagents.
Macintosh and Linux are not competition since they cannot run even a fraction of the Windows software out there. Ever heard of the phrase 'applications barrier to entry'. The reason that no serious competitor has emerged to challenge Microsoft on the desktop is because they cannot compete against the entrenched monopoly that holds all the cards. No amount of childish abuse will change that fact. I will concede that IE does [b]now[/b] pop up a box asking you if you want to install it. That has only been the case for a year. Blaming the users anyway is a pathetic cop out, would MS be able to get away with it on a level playing field? Of course they wouldn't.
And if Microsoft had competition in their marketplace? Would Windows be better or worse. Blaming the user for the flaws in Windows is an appalling argument. How the hell would a user know that their web browser could download malicious software silently. That idiotic functionality is built-in to IE and it shouldn't be. It's always the same arguments from MS apologists: it's the user's fault (but it's supposed to be easy to use); it's buggy drivers (so what's the HAL for?); oh you're just a communist et al.
Apple don't have a monopoly on online music, there are plenty of others about that you can use. However with even basic clerical jobs needing computer literacy and just about everything only running on Windows what other supplier can I go to? Linux is great but I can't run everything I want to on it. Apple might be cool but I'm not buying another computer for it. *BSD? Same problem as Linux.
People buy Windows because there's nothing else, due to the illegal (as declared in both US and EU courts) abuse of their monopoly position, and because it comes preloaded on their PCs. If there were alternatives that were practical Microsoft's only business advantage would melt away.
If he had obtained that money in a reasonably honest way and by producing the best product we'd be all over him. As it is he was handed a monopoly by IBM and has illegally defended said monopoly whilst producing sub-standard products that would have died in a competitive market. The antipathy I have towards Bill Gates is having to clean up his mess on my non-technical friends' and family's PCs because crushing the competition and fancy marketing was more important than making a decent product.
So whilst it's great that he donates to charity let's not forget that he obtained his fortune illegally.
Why Computer Science? Why bother?
More than there should be but not as many as you imply. On the other hand I have worked with some true genuises who can take whatever language and platform and make beautiful music. However I have only twice in 15 years in the industry worked for a manager with a clue, the rest being buzzword-spouting rubber stamps and/or bullies.
Unless they happen to be running something that is a threat to the MS monopoly, i.e. VMWare, and then they get seriously stung. This is another power play from MS dressed up as doing customers a favour.
So why not get liability insurance? This article is not an attack on FOSS anyway it's an attack on the incompetent commercial sector who have zero excuse for the poor quality of their code.
I'm confused by this whole argument. Developers defending the poor practices of IT management. When you have unrealistic deadlines, poorly thought out and constantly changing requirements and programmers working 60+ hours a week, you will get shit code. The problem with IT is at the top. The head of accounts in corporation is an accountant, the head of the legal department is a lawyer, but the head of IT could be just about anyone.
I don't know about cutting edge but Wurm Online is a 3d MMORPG written in Java and it seems to work pretty well.
I'd say lack of time and/or ability would prevent all but the truly determined and they would not be allowed to tell everyone else how to do it.
$50,000? In China?
The fundamental problem is that the UN has a huge for sale sign on it
Kind of like the US government then.
You have a point about Germany, however France as a country has existed for a lot longer than the US, irrespective of whether it had a constitution or not. Without France the US may not have existed but then you Yanks find it convenient to forget this just because they wouldn't kiss your ass over the unnecessary war in Iraq.
The US didn't invent the world but they want to control that.
What's braindead about not wanting black bars at the top and bottom? Having a large screen TV with half of it in black looks pretty silly to me.
Having worked for several large corporations I can assure you that large corporations are generally full of idiots.
Let's hope Microsoft hire lots of Indian programmers then :P
Netscape 8 is Windows only at the moment. Have they got plans for other versions or is this the final ruining of a once-cool browser.
Aye I thought I'd mention it as a reason for not using it as much (although I'm currently replying in it now ;)). FF has been a bit horrible since about 1.02 and if websites designers made more effort to support the three main browsers then FF would be uninstalled in short order. How damn cool is the voice control :)
Yes which is why I don't, I pay for my downloads if I do them which is rarely since I don't see why Apple/Napster or the record companies get to say what I do with that file as long as I don't use it illegally. I will pay £0.99 for an mp3 quite happily, I will very rarely and very grudgingly pay £0.99 for a DRM-crippled song. That is my objection to the record companies' heavy-handedness. I'm not a criminal, I'm a customer and as such should be treated as someone who pays their wages.
I think Opera is quicker but doesn't work as well (or at all) with some websites as Firefox even when identifying itself as IE or Netscape. That isn't Opera's fault but it is irritating which is why I don't use it as much as FF (I very very rarely come across a website that only works in IE these days before you say anything).
Fair enough I could probably dig the info out from Google, however your explanation sounds like fodder for that copy-paste troll lol.
I thought the US government was pretending that Shi'ites are the terrorist threat.