Look at RedHat, there's nothing that says OpenSource isn't profitable. You make your dough on support/extras/contracts/etc. I think the day will come too.
I stand corrected. And admittedly, that was one of those articles i only glossed over. Usually I read more in depth. Thanks for the correction, however there was no need for the tone in one of the replies.
seeking out minor errors to try and feel better than the writer does not make you as such. Lots of posters seem to do this, but what's the point. Usually the parent posted something that took some thought or some work, or a random synapse firing that the rest of us didnt have. In any case, there is usually someone who goes and tries to find a typo and point it out as if it somehow invalidates everything the parent wrote. Give people a break. I cant tell you how many typos/brainfarts i have in a day.
Excepting that there are companies whose sole purpose is telemarketing and they get paid by companies to sell their products. Thus no attachment to the corporation that makes the product and no us presence.
what if telemarketers had to register for a special kind of line. And anyone calling from that kind of line before the call goes through gets one of those automated little voices saying "you are calling.. A cell phone.. the time there is.. 2:00am.. " so they dont bother you in the middle of the night because of timezone differences or roaming with phones etc and they know its a cell phone and to leave you alone.
But that was sort of indirectly my point. If we are just buying a license, we should be entitled to replacements of media and unrestricted duplication of the media in any format (since the media itself has no value)
So it seems theyre saying one thing and doing another, trying to have it both ways.
Hardly seems offtopic. My point was that they are requesting information way out of their rights. And in the case i mentioned, they were denied the rights to those names, as they should be, and so should RIAA.
It seems that the real debate is over whether you are buying a license or the media.
If a license, then once youve bought the license to listen (which happens to come with a cd) then you should be able to destroy and recreate the cd any time or listen to the song on mp3 or download it because you have paid for the right to listen to it. Replacements should be free. Ive dropped a few cds and been totally pissed to have to buy another $16 copy. Then you may not sell that cd to anyone, even someone with a license. The media then has no value, and you have no right to claim money for it. But like most things, there is a cost for convenience, and under the table purchases happen.
If media, then you have to buy each type of media and the royalties are covered through percentages of the media sales. Technically, you should not be able to copy it, but through fair use they grant you that, and your mp3 player is happy. And I'm still not sure about whether you can sell that or not either. I'd say technically not unless you send proceeds to compensate for royalties.
I think SCO believes that since their code does some function, any code to do the same function is infringing on their patent. Oh dear, I'm going to get sued for my program computing 1+1=2 since SCO now owns that formula.
Reminds me of case a little while back where they wanted all the names of women who were pregnant within a few months at a clinic so they could check with each one and find out which one dumpstered their baby.
Firstly, when it was 100% government on the ARPA net, everyone with access was supposed to have access and if they messed with it they would be court marshalled. Secondly it obviously wasnt commercial and so greed never entered in as a reason for major change. Thirdly, there weren't enough people, or for that matter malicious people, who were on the net. Its apples and oranges. The internet was to ARPA as intranets are to us now. It would be like sabotaging your company network, and being dishonorably discharged for treason/sabotage.
I think that 'we didnt have this problem when the government was running things' is fairly irrelevant because things were so different.
I do however agree, the government is and always has been a saving grace in a lot of situations where something is simply too big for 'the people' to manage or for 'the people' to really be able to individually make a difference with regards to a desire of theirs or an annoyance.
Theyve been selling at roughly $100 / season, so im guessing the box will be ~$700, maybe a little more to have it all in one place, maybe a little less to encourage buying the box set. Though its probably a collectors item, so id expect to see closer to $800 or $900 and some extra features over the regular box sets individually.
Slashdot Mirror
Look at RedHat, there's nothing that says OpenSource isn't profitable. You make your dough on support/extras/contracts/etc. I think the day will come too.
~/The garbage man can!/~
-Simpsons: Trash of the Titans
Note the 15% equity stake, means they still have vested interest in sitefinder either way
I stand corrected. And admittedly, that was one of those articles i only glossed over. Usually I read more in depth. Thanks for the correction, however there was no need for the tone in one of the replies.
All i can say is 8 Words....1
5F05:2000:80AD:5800:0058:0800:2023:1D7
I hope we get all this dns junk figured out before ipv6. I'm not typing out addresses like that all day.
Hey not to mention, itll be fun when trillions of ips are all wanting some kind of dns name.
Another article said the bind patch broke some TLD's.
That is a fabulous link, amazing you found that.
Although interesting, it didn't necessarily address my pondering.
Do you think lotus would still have existed?
I wonder if VisiCalc had been able to obtain a software patent back then if Lotus would have made it at all?
seeking out minor errors to try and feel better than the writer does not make you as such. Lots of posters seem to do this, but what's the point. Usually the parent posted something that took some thought or some work, or a random synapse firing that the rest of us didnt have. In any case, there is usually someone who goes and tries to find a typo and point it out as if it somehow invalidates everything the parent wrote. Give people a break. I cant tell you how many typos/brainfarts i have in a day.
Wasnt visicalc before lotus 123? Or was visicalc renamed lotus 123? My memory is fuzzy back then, but there was some other product before 123.
Strange how they went Pentium, Pentium 5, Pentium Pro, Pentium II, Pentium III, then Pentium 4 instead of IV...
P5 was a marketing ploy by gateway I think wasnt it?
Yes but is it in PiB or PB?
I certainly want my PB drive to be PiB's not PB's =)
Excepting that there are companies whose sole purpose is telemarketing and they get paid by companies to sell their products. Thus no attachment to the corporation that makes the product and no us presence.
what if telemarketers had to register for a special kind of line. And anyone calling from that kind of line before the call goes through gets one of those automated little voices saying "you are calling .. A cell phone .. the time there is .. 2:00am .. " so they dont bother you in the middle of the night because of timezone differences or roaming with phones etc and they know its a cell phone and to leave you alone.
But that was sort of indirectly my point. If we are just buying a license, we should be entitled to replacements of media and unrestricted duplication of the media in any format (since the media itself has no value)
So it seems theyre saying one thing and doing another, trying to have it both ways.
Hardly seems offtopic. My point was that they are requesting information way out of their rights. And in the case i mentioned, they were denied the rights to those names, as they should be, and so should RIAA.
It seems that the real debate is over whether you are buying a license or the media.
If a license, then once youve bought the license to listen (which happens to come with a cd) then you should be able to destroy and recreate the cd any time or listen to the song on mp3 or download it because you have paid for the right to listen to it. Replacements should be free. Ive dropped a few cds and been totally pissed to have to buy another $16 copy. Then you may not sell that cd to anyone, even someone with a license. The media then has no value, and you have no right to claim money for it. But like most things, there is a cost for convenience, and under the table purchases happen.
If media, then you have to buy each type of media and the royalties are covered through percentages of the media sales. Technically, you should not be able to copy it, but through fair use they grant you that, and your mp3 player is happy. And I'm still not sure about whether you can sell that or not either. I'd say technically not unless you send proceeds to compensate for royalties.
You can't sue them just yet. The list just went into effect, and they have 30 days to comply once your number is added.
That gets me thinking... What is Internet3 was web only and internet1/2 banned www access? That would solve all our problems! [sarcastic]
I think SCO believes that since their code does some function, any code to do the same function is infringing on their patent. Oh dear, I'm going to get sued for my program computing 1+1=2 since SCO now owns that formula.
Reminds me of case a little while back where they wanted all the names of women who were pregnant within a few months at a clinic so they could check with each one and find out which one dumpstered their baby.
Firstly, when it was 100% government on the ARPA net, everyone with access was supposed to have access and if they messed with it they would be court marshalled. Secondly it obviously wasnt commercial and so greed never entered in as a reason for major change. Thirdly, there weren't enough people, or for that matter malicious people, who were on the net. Its apples and oranges. The internet was to ARPA as intranets are to us now. It would be like sabotaging your company network, and being dishonorably discharged for treason/sabotage.
I think that 'we didnt have this problem when the government was running things' is fairly irrelevant because things were so different.
I do however agree, the government is and always has been a saving grace in a lot of situations where something is simply too big for 'the people' to manage or for 'the people' to really be able to individually make a difference with regards to a desire of theirs or an annoyance.
How much is 449 pounds, roughly twice that in us or something?
Also, people dont always go by MSRP. Places like wally world sell below cost to be lowest price others sell way above cost due to conveniance.
this is not the same as the disney mechanism which had some other decay type right? some kind of coating i think that becomes opaque after opening?
Theyve been selling at roughly $100 / season, so im guessing the box will be ~$700, maybe a little more to have it all in one place, maybe a little less to encourage buying the box set. Though its probably a collectors item, so id expect to see closer to $800 or $900 and some extra features over the regular box sets individually.