In my (2) dot-com dealings, "IPO" was basically the exit strategy for the initial investors, their attempt to recover their money and let someone else shoulder the risk.
Often, it goes "try to sell the company; if we can't find a buyer, do an IPO." Not that this should worry anyone. You have to be currently healthy during an IPO, at least.
Since an Ion engine ionizes its supply of onboard gas (so it gets an electrical charge), then electrically accrelerates it out the back, that's why TIE fighters make that wooshing noise. All the gas they expel makes for enough of an atmosphere for sound to carry to the nearby cameras:)
Obviously you've never tried to return something at a megastore like, say, Best Buy. I had a computer CDRom. It was broken. They took it into their back room and said "it works on our system" (which, near as I can tell, meant it spun up). I said "it doesn't work on the CDRom you sold me yesterday".
Eventually, the manager simply said "Sorry, we cannot accept an opened return" and went to help another customer. They wouldn't get a 'higher manager', they just say Sorry then ignore you.
I suppose I could have escalated to the point where they called security, but once you're at the point where a) there's no staff helping you and b) the other customers in line are annoyed because your rants are getting in their way, you've lost.
So your plan would go like this: "It doesn't work!" They put it in their store CD, it plays. "Sure it does. Next!"
Sorry to be sobering about reality. Customer service is dead. The mega-stores shut down the local shops, now the mega-stores don't care about individual customers. We sowed it for ourselves.
No crime at time of arrest (but Adobe, maybe)
on
Sklyarov Indicted
·
· Score: 1
The Reuters story had one fascinating bit that the AP story neglected:
"ElcomSoft sold the $99 program, called Advanced eBook Processor, on its Web site for about a month before taking it off the market in June after Adobe complained.".
So at the time of the complaint by Adobe, the actual crime (conspiring for commercial advantage) wasn't even existing. THEY WEREN'T SELLING THE PRODUCT HERE ANYMORE!
This is truly bizarre. "Hi, your software violates US law, please stop selling it." "Okay." "Hey, we're back, we're going to have you arrested anyway."
(Yes, I now DMCA is the actual law being cited and covers breaking encryption, but the charges include about capitalizing on the encryption breaking and that simply isn't being done in the US. Plus, Adobe had already 'tainted' their case by admiting they knew of the product and had worked out a reconciliation with them.)
Personally, I hope someone with disabilities (blind, say) sues Adobe because their ebook standard not allowing voice-reading. The ADA doesn't cover it (only commercial facilities) but if any eBooks are used for gov't work, then there might be a case.
Translate "they want to resolve the issues brought up by privacy and human-rights activists" to 'they will wait until the furor dies down, then slide it in quietly when the activist's attention is devoted elsewhere.'
Or am I cynical? Most of the times there is an outcry against a new measure, the underlying economical motivation by the corporation does not change. Instead, they realize the PR costs have increased.
Faced with either rejecting the idea totally due to PR issues, or just waiting until the PR climate chances and they can proceed, it makes sense to just wait, then implement the perfectly good and economically sound idea once the controversy is passed.
Very rarely do such ideas go away just because of complaints, unless it's for a service-focused part of the business. And catching thieves isn't service-focused.
this _is_ speedy Re:whatever happened to...
on
Sklyarov Update
·
· Score: 1
Actually, in many ways he is getting a speedy trial. Mind you, 'speedy' is relative-- in this case, and no doubt lawyers could argue. July 17th to August 30 isn't that unusual for our always overloaded court system.
That he was held for a long time without bail was more interesting (he wasn't released until Aug 6, or about two weeks). Your primary right is to, if you are taken into custody, to be charged with something formally and to have your initial hearing, during which they also set bail.
The letter of the law seems to have been followed, even though the results of it are kinda weird. I don't think there'd be much of an argument on the process, but there are a million and one tactics the lawyers could use.
They could argue the validity of the charge, or jurisdiction, or DMCA itself, or whether due process was followed, or a lot of other things. Trial law is really weird.
It should be interesting to see the result, since some of the arguments may free him quickly, while others would attack the law itself-- a larger gain for society (IMHO) but perhaps suckier for Sklyarov.
Re:The most telling quote:
on
$1200 Cheap!
·
· Score: 1
Hi,
>retailers are the middlemen not the customers
Err, no, actually, retailers are the customers for Microsoft. Depending on how they distribute, that is. Either way, the retailers _buy_ the units and give the cash to Microsoft.
If no retailer buy it, MS gets no cash. Gamers can't buy units from MS, they buy from retailers.
Retailers then get to decide what to bundle, sell price, etc (except for deals requiring bundling to get a shipment, or licenses requiring no sales below MSRP, etc), but in all cases, Retailers are Microsoft's customers. Gamers are the Retailer's customers.
It's a weird two-tier system, but that's how it is. (It becomes 3 tiers with distribution outfits).
I just sold my old Atari Portfolio (VHS-sized DOS portable that ran on AA), for around $100. Then used that money to get a new MAKO (smaller, more memory, more utility, just as durable). So there, the collector's market was weird enough for me to 'flip' to a better device.
Ironically, despite the Model 100's rep for being still useful, the best offer I got for mine was $50. At $50, I'm keeping it as a toy for when I run luddite flashbacks.
So, despite the article citing $250 values for it, the market is very hit or miss. And if you check eBay, you'll find prices are pretty low (best are at around the $100 mark) for these.
Nice machine, but even as useful as it is, I think only folks already using it (who need it for legacy work or to replace their own) are getting them, and that really means a limited market. Unless you run Club 100 and are seen as the main outlet for these.
A Celestron "Celestar 8" with fork mount and
computer s/w to help with tracking starts at
around $1100. Figure $1500 to get the telescope,
a good eyepiece, and software. The 9 1-4 (used
in the article) is around $1500, again add a few hundred for an excellent eyepiece and for software and you still come in around $2000.
The author just used a pretty standard webcam, so we're talking $100 here, plus $50 in mounting gear. Note that if you mount the camera in place of the eyepiece, you can skip my recommendation of getting a really good eyepiece and let the camera serve.
You can also use any 35mm camera with a telescope, using a simple t-adapter ($40) to attach it. If you spend, oh, $500 you could get a digital SLR and then have fun using that.
But ultimately, I say go with a C-8 and good webcam and do it for under $2000. I like the C-8s because they are highly portable, easy to set up, and fun!
Pick up an issue of "Sky and Telescope" for prices before you start shopping, of course.
Yes, merchants will indeed set up with a system that excludes customers. In the book trade, I've seen store sites and publisher sites that:
Require Explorer to visit
Require the Flash plugin to _shop_
Require signing up with PayPal for any purchase
A lot of online stores and corporations aren't really tech-smart, and go with whichever pitch bluffed them best. Saying "use our system and you get almost all internet users" sounds good.
Heck, some of them accept systems even when told they are blocking out 10% of their potential customers. Their logic, "it would be too expensive/difficult to change everything just for the 10% of people who are using odd systems, and most people using those probably aren't our customers anyway."
If the reasonable standard is "AOL users might get confused", I think we're all in trouble of losing our domains. Mine, for example, has letters and dots and thus could cause confusion.
Slashdot Mirror
In my (2) dot-com dealings, "IPO" was basically the exit strategy for the initial investors, their attempt to recover their money and let someone else shoulder the risk.
Often, it goes "try to sell the company; if we can't find a buyer, do an IPO." Not that this should worry anyone. You have to be currently healthy during an IPO, at least.
Since an Ion engine ionizes its supply of onboard gas (so it gets an electrical charge), then electrically accrelerates it out the back, that's why TIE fighters make that wooshing noise. All the gas they expel makes for enough of an atmosphere for sound to carry to the nearby cameras :)
>Firstly, this is one of the few times the Garner Group has openly critisised a Microsoft product
I hope they weren't using Frontpage when they wrote it. "Garner found in license violation."
Hi,
Obviously you've never tried to return something at a megastore like, say, Best Buy. I had a computer CDRom. It was broken. They took it into their back room and said "it works on our system" (which, near as I can tell, meant it spun up). I said "it doesn't work on the CDRom you sold me yesterday".
Eventually, the manager simply said "Sorry, we cannot accept an opened return" and went to help another customer. They wouldn't get a 'higher manager', they just say Sorry then ignore you.
I suppose I could have escalated to the point where they called security, but once you're at the point where a) there's no staff helping you and b) the other customers in line are annoyed because your rants are getting in their way, you've lost.
So your plan would go like this: "It doesn't work!" They put it in their store CD, it plays. "Sure it does. Next!"
Sorry to be sobering about reality. Customer service is dead. The mega-stores shut down the local shops, now the mega-stores don't care about individual customers. We sowed it for ourselves.
The Reuters story had one fascinating bit that the AP story neglected:
"ElcomSoft sold the $99 program, called Advanced eBook Processor, on its Web site for about a month before taking it off the market in June after Adobe complained.".
So at the time of the complaint by Adobe, the actual crime (conspiring for commercial advantage) wasn't even existing. THEY WEREN'T SELLING THE PRODUCT HERE ANYMORE!
This is truly bizarre. "Hi, your software violates US law, please stop selling it." "Okay." "Hey, we're back, we're going to have you arrested anyway."
(Yes, I now DMCA is the actual law being cited and covers breaking encryption, but the charges include about capitalizing on the encryption breaking and that simply isn't being done in the US. Plus, Adobe had already 'tainted' their case by admiting they knew of the product and had worked out a reconciliation with them.)
Personally, I hope someone with disabilities (blind, say) sues Adobe because their ebook standard not allowing voice-reading. The ADA doesn't cover it (only commercial facilities) but if any eBooks are used for gov't work, then there might be a case.
Also, if a dealer builds a dual-boot, in many cases that means they have to halve their hard drive specs due to partitioning for each.
"Gee, I could buy this 30GB system, or.. wait, this dual-boot has only 15GB for Windows and 15GB for linux, sounds like I'm getting less."
Translate "they want to resolve the issues brought up by privacy and human-rights activists" to 'they will wait until the furor dies down, then slide it in quietly when the activist's attention is devoted elsewhere.'
Or am I cynical? Most of the times there is an outcry against a new measure, the underlying economical motivation by the corporation does not change. Instead, they realize the PR costs have increased.
Faced with either rejecting the idea totally due to PR issues, or just waiting until the PR climate chances and they can proceed, it makes sense to just wait, then implement the perfectly good and economically sound idea once the controversy is passed.
Very rarely do such ideas go away just because of complaints, unless it's for a service-focused part of the business. And catching thieves isn't service-focused.
Actually, in many ways he is getting a speedy trial. Mind you, 'speedy' is relative-- in this case, and no doubt lawyers could argue. July 17th to August 30 isn't that unusual for our always overloaded court system.
That he was held for a long time without bail was more interesting (he wasn't released until Aug 6, or about two weeks). Your primary right is to, if you are taken into custody, to be charged with something formally and to have your initial hearing, during which they also set bail.
The letter of the law seems to have been followed, even though the results of it are kinda weird. I don't think there'd be much of an argument on the process, but there are a million and one tactics the lawyers could use.
They could argue the validity of the charge, or jurisdiction, or DMCA itself, or whether due process was followed, or a lot of other things. Trial law is really weird.
It should be interesting to see the result, since some of the arguments may free him quickly, while others would attack the law itself-- a larger gain for society (IMHO) but perhaps suckier for Sklyarov.
Hi,
>retailers are the middlemen not the customers
Err, no, actually, retailers are the customers for Microsoft. Depending on how they distribute, that is. Either way, the retailers _buy_ the units and give the cash to Microsoft.
If no retailer buy it, MS gets no cash. Gamers can't buy units from MS, they buy from retailers.
Retailers then get to decide what to bundle, sell price, etc (except for deals requiring bundling to get a shipment, or licenses requiring no sales below MSRP, etc), but in all cases, Retailers are Microsoft's customers. Gamers are the Retailer's customers.
It's a weird two-tier system, but that's how it is. (It becomes 3 tiers with distribution outfits).
Hi,
I just sold my old Atari Portfolio (VHS-sized DOS portable that ran on AA), for around $100. Then used that money to get a new MAKO (smaller, more memory, more utility, just as durable). So there, the collector's market was weird enough for me to 'flip' to a better device.
Ironically, despite the Model 100's rep for being still useful, the best offer I got for mine was $50. At $50, I'm keeping it as a toy for when I run luddite flashbacks.
So, despite the article citing $250 values for it, the market is very hit or miss. And if you check eBay, you'll find prices are pretty low (best are at around the $100 mark) for these.
Nice machine, but even as useful as it is, I think only folks already using it (who need it for legacy work or to replace their own) are getting them, and that really means a limited market. Unless you run Club 100 and are seen as the main outlet for these.
Just fyi.
The author just used a pretty standard webcam, so we're talking $100 here, plus $50 in mounting gear. Note that if you mount the camera in place of the eyepiece, you can skip my recommendation of getting a really good eyepiece and let the camera serve.
You can also use any 35mm camera with a telescope, using a simple t-adapter ($40) to attach it. If you spend, oh, $500 you could get a digital SLR and then have fun using that.
But ultimately, I say go with a C-8 and good webcam and do it for under $2000. I like the C-8s because they are highly portable, easy to set up, and fun!
Pick up an issue of "Sky and Telescope" for prices before you start shopping, of course.
Yes, merchants will indeed set up with a system that excludes customers. In the book trade, I've seen store sites and publisher sites that:
- Require Explorer to visit
- Require the Flash plugin to _shop_
- Require signing up with PayPal for any purchase
A lot of online stores and corporations aren't really tech-smart, and go with whichever pitch bluffed them best. Saying "use our system and you get almost all internet users" sounds good.Heck, some of them accept systems even when told they are blocking out 10% of their potential customers. Their logic, "it would be too expensive/difficult to change everything just for the 10% of people who are using odd systems, and most people using those probably aren't our customers anyway."
Argh! I hate consulting!
If the reasonable standard is "AOL users might get confused", I think we're all in trouble of losing our domains. Mine, for example, has letters and dots and thus could cause confusion.