From Frazier's Bad Coriolis... Is it possible to detect the Earth's rotation in a draining sink?
Yes, but it is very difficult. Because the Coriolis force is so small, one must go to extraordinary lengths to detect it. But, it has been done. You cannot use an ordinary sink for it lacks the requisite circular symmetry: its oval shape and off-center drain render any results suspect. Those who have succeeded used a smooth pan of about one meter in diameter with a very small hole in the center. A stopper (which could be removed from below so as to not introduce any spurious motion) blocked the hole while the pan was being filled with water. The water was then allowed to sit undisturbed for perhaps a week to let all of the motion die out which was introduced during filling. Then, the stopper was removed (from below). Because the hole was very small, the pan drained slowly indeed. This was necessary, because it takes hours before the tiny Coriolis force could develop sufficient deviation in the draining water for it to produce a circular flow. With these procedures, it was found that the rotation was always cyclonic. Taken from www.ems.psu.edu/~fraser/Bad/BadCoriolis.html
Yes, it's got a different set of games. That's why I included the list with the link. IMHO, the set of games is better than the Atari version. Portable Pitfall for $20 makes it worth it, to me. Grand Prix is pretty good too, though I'm not too sure I remember the others. On the other hand, how did Atari forget about Space Invaders? I used to have the stand alone version in my basement, along with the original Asteroids stand-up. I couldn't even tell you how many hours (years?) i spent in front of those.
Here ya go... no need to get that embarassing avon charge on your credit card. Activision games include River Raid, Pitfall, Tennis, Freeway, Spider Fighter, Atlantis, Crackpots, Boxing, Ice Hockey and Grand Prix.
Plus, it's got a better form factor, though you give up the coolness of it looking like a 2600 pad. Check it out, same price For the link weary... http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B 00005U2P0/ ref%3Dnosim/shophub2-20/102-8676922-9561709
Hate to be a grammer/English nazi; but even if your points were valid, they get lost when you make yourself look ignorant. The correct way to spell "it's self" is itself and "protect it's people" translates to protect it is people. Terrorism is not the act of attacking a government through its(no appostraphe) people, it's (it is) the act of promoting your own agenda by scaring the shit out of your supposed oppressor. It's(again, it is) using terror to get your point across, hence the word terrorism. "Terrorism would be the unauthorized use of force." Um, unauthorized by whom? The terrorist attacks of 9/11 were quite authorized, just not by a government that is recognized by the USA. Al Qaeda is a government of its own sort, until we invaded Afghanistan (rightfully) they governed the people.
With millions of cargo shipments coming in and thousands of planes in the air daily there's no way to secure it. The plans we've come up with seem similar to Microsoft's plans for 'Security'... i.e. The US governement seems to be securing their position rather than securing the people. I'd rather live in fear of terrorism than fear of the US government, something that's becoming more fearful everyday.
I was stuck at the Hyatt in downtown Chicago this past weekend and was watching Forbes on Fox. Steve Forbes and his writers and editors were speculating on tech futures when they brought up hopeful Nokia and Motorola sales increases. One of the panel, via satelite, discounted the possible sales increase with the reasoning that Microsoft is entering the cell arena with OEMs rather than traditional cell phone manufacturers and that that would stimey Moto and Nokia. To which one of the enlightenned panel members replied: I've had to agonize with Microsoft on my computer, I certainly don't want them on my cell phone." It was an unexpected comment and I couldn't stop chuckling.
One of the side effects of this is that plenty of cable television networks will not survive. Eventually the cable companies will be able to weed out the networks that do nothing to increase their viewer base and just suck up money. Comedy Central will make a much bigger cut of the cable money pie, as will Food Network(I'm guessing here, but I love it), CNN, Lifetime(unfortunately) and a few others (I'll leave the readers to fill-in their own blanks). At the same time those bandwidth/money sucking networks would get a smaller and smaller piece. My point is: Showtime is a premium pay movie channel... OF COURSE they want bigger [market] penetration. It means more money for them. They are a business. It's tantamount to Ford saying "We hope our dealers use whatever tools are at their disposal to sell more cars."
That was great, but it would've been just as funny if you cut it all down to one line:
so the people can't get the unbiased reporting that CNN provides?
HAH! (RANT) I'm completely convinced that there is no unbiased reporting in america. The journalists/producers/editors in america all bow down to the white house when instructed to. As far as I can tell the only unencumbered television news agencies are the BBC and (believe it or not) Al-Jazeera. (/RANT) well, that's OT, huh? -1 Offtopic
Re:No, you can't get MTV a la cart, read it again.
on
Cable TV A La Carte?
·
· Score: 2
Actually, I believe that the $44 vs the $89 is to combat cable piracy. It was discovered a while back (prolly been exploited for a couple years now) that all you need to do is splice the cable to your modem, just as you would to split signals between tv sets, and viola... free cable TV. So, if you don't get cable tv from us, we're going to charge you for it anyway. That way, we don't care if you're splitting it off for free TV.
Yes, everyone seems to be focusing on the viable business thing, with good reason. The wording is ambiguous at best and I am not a lawyer. I'll go out on a limb here and guess that you aren't either. I'm asking a lawyer his opinion on the wording, as he is trained in such things. You're question about remedies is written right there in the judgement; but you're question about the 'security carve-out' is one that does need addressing. However, just because you think you know what J2(c) means, doesn't mean you do (the wording is ambiguous at best and leaves plenty to interpretation) and doesn't mean that it's not a valid question that we should be posing to a lawyer.
Section J explains what the judgement doesn't intend to do. In J2 it talks about not putting conditions on Microsoft about how they'll be licensing the APIs and protocols to third parties then continues on in J2(c) say that the third party may be subject to conditions set by Microsoft that the third party:
meets reasonable, objective standards established by Microsoft for certifying the authenticity and viability of its business
So, does that mean that they can refuse the APIs and protocols to Open Source projects claiming that they don't consider them viable business models? In the other sections it points out the Microsoft is not allowed to be discriminatory, so which one overrides the other?
For those looking for a great open source remote security scanner, check out www.nessus.org. Nessus is client/server (clients for a few platforms, server runs on unix only) scanner that runs through thousands of exploits and DoS attacks and gives you a full report on what you have open/running and how to secure it along with CERT advisories and all kinds of info. It's a great way to see just how easy it is to break into an unpatched box, whether it's *nix or win32. First few times I ran it I crashed every box on my LAN, by the fourth time I ran it, I was possitively secured. Great tool, can't say enough about it.
J. No provision of this Final Judgment shall: 1. Require Microsoft to document, disclose or license to third parties: (a) portions of APIs or Documentation or portions or layers of Communications Protocols the disclosure of which would compromise the security of a particular installation or group of installations of anti-piracy, anti-virus, software licensing, digital rights management, encryption or authentication systems, including without limitation, keys, authorization tokens or enforcement criteria; or (b) any API, interface or other information related to any Microsoft product if lawfully directed not to do so by a governmental agency of competent jurisdiction. 2. Prevent Microsoft from conditioning any license of any API, Documentation or Communications Protocol related to anti-piracy systems, anti-virus technologies, license enforcement mechanisms, authentication/authorization security, or third party intellectual property protection mechanisms of any Microsoft product to any person or entity on the requirement that the licensee: (a) has no history of software counterfeiting or piracy or willful violation of intellectual property rights, (b) has a reasonable business need for the API, Documentation or Communications Protocol for a planned or shipping product, (c) meets reasonable, objective standards established by Microsoft for certifying the authenticity and viability of its business, (d) agrees to submit, at its own expense, any computer program using such APIs, Documentation or Communication Protocols to third-party verification, approved by Microsoft, to test for and ensure verification and compliance with Microsoft specifications for use of the API or interface, which specifications shall be related to proper operation and integrity of the systems and mechanisms identified in this paragraph.
We're sorry, we don't consider giving binaries and source code away for free a viable business model. Go away Samba team. What? What's that about interoperating with Exchange? Yeah, right! Go away stupid free groupware project.
E. Starting three months after the entry of this Final Judgment to the Court, Microsoft shall make available for use by third parties, for the sole purpose of interoperating or communicating with a Windows Operating System Product, on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms (consistent with Section III.I), any Communications Protocol that is, on or after the date this Final Judgment is submitted to the Court, (i) implemented in a Windows Operating System Product installed on a client computer, and (ii) used to interoperate, or communicate, natively (i.e., without the addition of software code to the client operating system product) with a Microsoft server operating system product.
1. Installing, and displaying icons, shortcuts, or menu entries for, any Non-Microsoft Middleware or any product or service (including but not limited to IAP products or services) that distributes, uses, promotes, or supports any Non-Microsoft Middleware, on the desktop or Start menu, or anywhere else in a Windows Operating System Product where a list of icons, shortcuts, or menu entries for applications are generally displayed, except that Microsoft may restrict an OEM from displaying icons, shortcuts and menu entries for any product in any list of such icons, shortcuts, or menu entries specified in the Windows documentation as being limited to products that provide particular types of functionality, provided that the restrictions are non-discriminatory with respect to non-Microsoft and Microsoft products.
So, I'm an OEM that is trying to make a name as "The Scientists' OEM" or some such thing. Microsoft doesn't make a suite of tools for measuring volcanic or platonic shifts and vibrations, or whatever. So does that mean that Microsoft can tell me (the OEM) that I can't put icons and shortcuts for all the scientific tools I'm trying to push as value-add as the OEM?
This is a freebie from the French governement really. They hired MandrakeSoft to create it for them, and MandrakeSoft turned around and said something along the lines of "You realize we're going to give this to everyone to play with and use don't you?" To which the French government replied "I don't care, I'm not gonna sell the thing, I just need it for virtual weapons testing, did i say weapons testing, I meant happy camps."
So Mandrake didn't really do this to make more money off it, they're already getting paid for it, we just get a nice new toy to play with.
It's not over yet! The 0.1% of those who voted for "Not Saddam" are calling for a recount of the Floridastan votes.
Re:Or you could just...
on
Xandros 1.0
·
· Score: 2
Then I show them a Linux machine, and tell them that the reason it's better, is because it's nothing like Windows. Why is that better? If you told me that you'd get nothing but a blank stare. Would you elaborate a bit more? How's it nothing like Windows? It's an OS right? People can 'benefit from Linux's superiority' without the time investment. They can benefit immediately just be installing it. Not everyone needs to know how to edit smb.conf in order to make a shared resource, distros like Xandros make sure of that. That's the point of all of these Windows mimics. Make it easy. When they switch they can take it as far as they want; but why not make it easy for them to run Quicken, M$ Office, Lotus Notes and Quicktime Plugin. Xandros is designed for people who will never need to configure a webserver or ldap. It's designed to let them use their computer, in the way they want, and in a way that's familiar/easy. That's it. Oh, and on the RedHat front, I use it everyday, along with several other distros; but RedHat is the easiest way to lose new users to dependency hell. Why RedHat doesn't incorporate urpmi into the distro baffles me. I suppose it's a marketting decision to not give any sort of a nod to Mandrake, but I digress.
Re:Just to get this over with:
on
Xandros 1.0
·
· Score: 3, Informative
In this case, you can not simply copy and give it away. This particular distribution includes Codeweavers Crossover Office and Crossover Plugin, two proprietary wine implementations that have a per-seat price. I do believe that Xandros allows you to install on any machine you'd like (if you have more than one box); but you can't distribute the non-free code/apps. Not that I'm against this methodology, in fact, I brought it up to Jeremy White a long time ago, when I was trying to make a Mandrake+Mosix+LTSP distribution (now dead). There is nothing wrong (legally, morally is a different issue) with bundling non-free/non-GPL apps in a Linux ditribution and charging per-seat licensing. There is something wrong with pirating commercial software. If you don't want to pay for it, don't use it. I know lots of folks here disagree with that, but if you want people to respect the GPL you must respect the licensing of the software you use.
As far as I know, patent pending is a legal tactic to stretch-out a patent's time of exclusivity. When a company has a 'patent pending' it pretty much means everyone who is using the not-patented-yet technique is screwed. IIRC, Colgate used this technique with its Total toothpaste that leaves some kind of layer of chemical protection on your enamel(sp?). It allows that 'patent' (which isn't really a patent yet) to be stretched out to about twenty years. Someone please correct me or elaborate further...
While I agree with you to some extent, what if your grandfather brought about his own diseased heart? You would not have a predisposition to it from him (although you might from other members of your family tree that never actually suffered heart disease). You might be fooling yourself into thinking that not smoking and drinking lots of anticarcinogens is helping you, not knowing that your great-great-great-grandma had a hell of an alcoholism/adictivism kick in her gene pool that drinking all that red wine is plugging into. Just a thought.
I think that's a bit too much conspiring for M$, that said, you did strike a chord in me.
What if M$ was planning on shipping Apache on win32? It wouldn't be a bad move for microsoft. They get a stable code-base to work from, get to make any proprietary extensions they want, get all their own modules running on it (running better under their own version than on the open versions, of course) and BAM! Ship Windows.NET Enterprise 2006 Featuring ApacheM$. I think I'd do it if I were them.
Slashdot Mirror
If you don't use PPPoE and want to test some of these theories, you can try a "ifconfig eth0 mtu 1400" where eth0 is your network connection.
From Frazier's Bad Coriolis...
Is it possible to detect the Earth's rotation in a draining sink?
Yes, but it is very difficult. Because the Coriolis force is so small, one must go to extraordinary lengths to detect it. But, it has been done. You cannot use an ordinary sink for it lacks the requisite circular symmetry: its oval shape and off-center drain render any results suspect. Those who have succeeded used a smooth pan of about one meter in diameter with a very small hole in the center. A stopper (which could be removed from below so as to not introduce any spurious motion) blocked the hole while the pan was being filled with water. The water was then allowed to sit undisturbed for perhaps a week to let all of the motion die out which was introduced during filling. Then, the stopper was removed (from below). Because the hole was very small, the pan drained slowly indeed. This was necessary, because it takes hours before the tiny Coriolis force could develop sufficient deviation in the draining water for it to produce a circular flow. With these procedures, it was found that the rotation was always cyclonic.
Taken from www.ems.psu.edu/~fraser/Bad/BadCoriolis.html
Yes, it's got a different set of games. That's why I included the list with the link. IMHO, the set of games is better than the Atari version. Portable Pitfall for $20 makes it worth it, to me. Grand Prix is pretty good too, though I'm not too sure I remember the others. On the other hand, how did Atari forget about Space Invaders? I used to have the stand alone version in my basement, along with the original Asteroids stand-up. I couldn't even tell you how many hours (years?) i spent in front of those.
Here ya go... no need to get that embarassing avon charge on your credit card.B 00005U2P0/ ref%3Dnosim/shophub2-20/102-8676922-9561709
Activision games include River Raid, Pitfall, Tennis, Freeway, Spider Fighter, Atlantis, Crackpots, Boxing, Ice Hockey and Grand Prix.
Plus, it's got a better form factor, though you give up the coolness of it looking like a 2600 pad.
Check it out, same price
For the link weary...
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/
Hate to be a grammer/English nazi; but even if your points were valid, they get lost when you make yourself look ignorant. The correct way to spell "it's self" is itself and "protect it's people" translates to protect it is people. Terrorism is not the act of attacking a government through its(no appostraphe) people, it's (it is) the act of promoting your own agenda by scaring the shit out of your supposed oppressor. It's(again, it is) using terror to get your point across, hence the word terrorism.
"Terrorism would be the unauthorized use of force." Um, unauthorized by whom? The terrorist attacks of 9/11 were quite authorized, just not by a government that is recognized by the USA. Al Qaeda is a government of its own sort, until we invaded Afghanistan (rightfully) they governed the people.
With millions of cargo shipments coming in and thousands of planes in the air daily there's no way to secure it. The plans we've come up with seem similar to Microsoft's plans for 'Security'... i.e. The US governement seems to be securing their position rather than securing the people. I'd rather live in fear of terrorism than fear of the US government, something that's becoming more fearful everyday.
I was stuck at the Hyatt in downtown Chicago this past weekend and was watching Forbes on Fox. Steve Forbes and his writers and editors were speculating on tech futures when they brought up hopeful Nokia and Motorola sales increases. One of the panel, via satelite, discounted the possible sales increase with the reasoning that Microsoft is entering the cell arena with OEMs rather than traditional cell phone manufacturers and that that would stimey Moto and Nokia. To which one of the enlightenned panel members replied:
I've had to agonize with Microsoft on my computer, I certainly don't want them on my cell phone."
It was an unexpected comment and I couldn't stop chuckling.
One of the side effects of this is that plenty of cable television networks will not survive. Eventually the cable companies will be able to weed out the networks that do nothing to increase their viewer base and just suck up money. Comedy Central will make a much bigger cut of the cable money pie, as will Food Network(I'm guessing here, but I love it), CNN, Lifetime(unfortunately) and a few others (I'll leave the readers to fill-in their own blanks). At the same time those bandwidth/money sucking networks would get a smaller and smaller piece.
My point is: Showtime is a premium pay movie channel... OF COURSE they want bigger [market] penetration. It means more money for them. They are a business. It's tantamount to Ford saying "We hope our dealers use whatever tools are at their disposal to sell more cars."
That was great, but it would've been just as funny if you cut it all down to one line:
so the people can't get the unbiased reporting that CNN provides?
HAH!
(RANT) I'm completely convinced that there is no unbiased reporting in america. The journalists/producers/editors in america all bow down to the white house when instructed to. As far as I can tell the only unencumbered television news agencies are the BBC and (believe it or not) Al-Jazeera. (/RANT)
well, that's OT, huh? -1 Offtopic
Actually, I believe that the $44 vs the $89 is to combat cable piracy. It was discovered a while back (prolly been exploited for a couple years now) that all you need to do is splice the cable to your modem, just as you would to split signals between tv sets, and viola... free cable TV. So, if you don't get cable tv from us, we're going to charge you for it anyway. That way, we don't care if you're splitting it off for free TV.
Yes, everyone seems to be focusing on the viable business thing, with good reason. The wording is ambiguous at best and I am not a lawyer. I'll go out on a limb here and guess that you aren't either. I'm asking a lawyer his opinion on the wording, as he is trained in such things. You're question about remedies is written right there in the judgement; but you're question about the 'security carve-out' is one that does need addressing. However, just because you think you know what J2(c) means, doesn't mean you do (the wording is ambiguous at best and leaves plenty to interpretation) and doesn't mean that it's not a valid question that we should be posing to a lawyer.
Section J explains what the judgement doesn't intend to do. In J2 it talks about not putting conditions on Microsoft about how they'll be licensing the APIs and protocols to third parties then continues on in J2(c) say that the third party may be subject to conditions set by Microsoft that the third party:
meets reasonable, objective standards established by Microsoft for certifying the
authenticity and viability of its business
So, does that mean that they can refuse the APIs and protocols to Open Source projects claiming that they don't consider them viable business models?
In the other sections it points out the Microsoft is not allowed to be discriminatory, so which one overrides the other?
For those looking for a great open source remote security scanner, check out www.nessus.org. Nessus is client/server (clients for a few platforms, server runs on unix only) scanner that runs through thousands of exploits and DoS attacks and gives you a full report on what you have open/running and how to secure it along with CERT advisories and all kinds of info. It's a great way to see just how easy it is to break into an unpatched box, whether it's *nix or win32. First few times I ran it I crashed every box on my LAN, by the fourth time I ran it, I was possitively secured. Great tool, can't say enough about it.
J. No provision of this Final Judgment shall:
1. Require Microsoft to document, disclose or license to third parties: (a) portions of
APIs or Documentation or portions or layers of Communications Protocols the
disclosure of which would compromise the security of a particular installation or
group of installations of anti-piracy, anti-virus, software licensing, digital rights
management, encryption or authentication systems, including without limitation,
keys, authorization tokens or enforcement criteria; or (b) any API, interface or
other information related to any Microsoft product if lawfully directed not to do
so by a governmental agency of competent jurisdiction.
2. Prevent Microsoft from conditioning any license of any API, Documentation or
Communications Protocol related to anti-piracy systems, anti-virus technologies,
license enforcement mechanisms, authentication/authorization security, or third
party intellectual property protection mechanisms of any Microsoft product to any
person or entity on the requirement that the licensee: (a) has no history of
software counterfeiting or piracy or willful violation of intellectual property
rights, (b) has a reasonable business need for the API, Documentation or
Communications Protocol for a planned or shipping product, (c) meets
reasonable, objective standards established by Microsoft for certifying the
authenticity and viability of its business, (d) agrees to submit, at its own expense,
any computer program using such APIs, Documentation or Communication
Protocols to third-party verification, approved by Microsoft, to test for and ensure
verification and compliance with Microsoft specifications for use of the API or
interface, which specifications shall be related to proper operation and integrity of
the systems and mechanisms identified in this paragraph.
We're sorry, we don't consider giving binaries and source code away for free a viable business model. Go away Samba team. What? What's that about interoperating with Exchange? Yeah, right! Go away stupid free groupware project.
E. Starting three months after the entry of this Final Judgment to the Court, Microsoft shall
:)
make available for use by third parties, for the sole purpose of interoperating or
communicating with a Windows Operating System Product, on reasonable and
non-discriminatory terms (consistent with Section III.I), any Communications Protocol
that is, on or after the date this Final Judgment is submitted to the Court, (i) implemented
in a Windows Operating System Product installed on a client computer, and (ii) used to
interoperate, or communicate, natively (i.e., without the addition of software code to the
client operating system product) with a Microsoft server operating system product.
Sweet! Interoperability here we come!
1. Installing, and displaying icons, shortcuts, or menu entries for, any Non-Microsoft
Middleware or any product or service (including but not limited to IAP products
or services) that distributes, uses, promotes, or supports any Non-Microsoft
Middleware, on the desktop or Start menu, or anywhere else in a Windows
Operating System Product where a list of icons, shortcuts, or menu entries for
applications are generally displayed, except that Microsoft may restrict an OEM
from displaying icons, shortcuts and menu entries for any product in any list of
such icons, shortcuts, or menu entries specified in the Windows documentation as
being limited to products that provide particular types of functionality, provided
that the restrictions are non-discriminatory with respect to non-Microsoft and
Microsoft products.
So, I'm an OEM that is trying to make a name as "The Scientists' OEM" or some such thing. Microsoft doesn't make a suite of tools for measuring volcanic or platonic shifts and vibrations, or whatever. So does that mean that Microsoft can tell me (the OEM) that I can't put icons and shortcuts for all the scientific tools I'm trying to push as value-add as the OEM?
This is a freebie from the French governement really. They hired MandrakeSoft to create it for them, and MandrakeSoft turned around and said something along the lines of "You realize we're going to give this to everyone to play with and use don't you?" To which the French government replied "I don't care, I'm not gonna sell the thing, I just need it for virtual weapons testing, did i say weapons testing, I meant happy camps."
So Mandrake didn't really do this to make more money off it, they're already getting paid for it, we just get a nice new toy to play with.
Mandrake is compiled for i586, so you're gonna have to at least drop a pentium in to those old mobos...
I didn't even know I was this interested in console history. I can't stop reading, this is quite fascinating. Thanks for the link.
It's not over yet! The 0.1% of those who voted for "Not Saddam" are calling for a recount of the Floridastan votes.
Then I show them a Linux machine, and tell them that the reason it's better, is because it's nothing like Windows.
Why is that better? If you told me that you'd get nothing but a blank stare. Would you elaborate a bit more? How's it nothing like Windows? It's an OS right? People can 'benefit from Linux's superiority' without the time investment. They can benefit immediately just be installing it. Not everyone needs to know how to edit smb.conf in order to make a shared resource, distros like Xandros make sure of that. That's the point of all of these Windows mimics. Make it easy. When they switch they can take it as far as they want; but why not make it easy for them to run Quicken, M$ Office, Lotus Notes and Quicktime Plugin. Xandros is designed for people who will never need to configure a webserver or ldap. It's designed to let them use their computer, in the way they want, and in a way that's familiar/easy. That's it. Oh, and on the RedHat front, I use it everyday, along with several other distros; but RedHat is the easiest way to lose new users to dependency hell. Why RedHat doesn't incorporate urpmi into the distro baffles me. I suppose it's a marketting decision to not give any sort of a nod to Mandrake, but I digress.
In this case, you can not simply copy and give it away. This particular distribution includes Codeweavers Crossover Office and Crossover Plugin, two proprietary wine implementations that have a per-seat price. I do believe that Xandros allows you to install on any machine you'd like (if you have more than one box); but you can't distribute the non-free code/apps. Not that I'm against this methodology, in fact, I brought it up to Jeremy White a long time ago, when I was trying to make a Mandrake+Mosix+LTSP distribution (now dead). There is nothing wrong (legally, morally is a different issue) with bundling non-free/non-GPL apps in a Linux ditribution and charging per-seat licensing. There is something wrong with pirating commercial software. If you don't want to pay for it, don't use it.
I know lots of folks here disagree with that, but if you want people to respect the GPL you must respect the licensing of the software you use.
As far as I know, patent pending is a legal tactic to stretch-out a patent's time of exclusivity. When a company has a 'patent pending' it pretty much means everyone who is using the not-patented-yet technique is screwed. IIRC, Colgate used this technique with its Total toothpaste that leaves some kind of layer of chemical protection on your enamel(sp?). It allows that 'patent' (which isn't really a patent yet) to be stretched out to about twenty years. Someone please correct me or elaborate further...
While I agree with you to some extent, what if your grandfather brought about his own diseased heart? You would not have a predisposition to it from him (although you might from other members of your family tree that never actually suffered heart disease). You might be fooling yourself into thinking that not smoking and drinking lots of anticarcinogens is helping you, not knowing that your great-great-great-grandma had a hell of an alcoholism/adictivism kick in her gene pool that drinking all that red wine is plugging into.
Just a thought.
I think that's a bit too much conspiring for M$, that said, you did strike a chord in me.
.NET Enterprise 2006 Featuring ApacheM$. I think I'd do it if I were them.
What if M$ was planning on shipping Apache on win32? It wouldn't be a bad move for microsoft. They get a stable code-base to work from, get to make any proprietary extensions they want, get all their own modules running on it (running better under their own version than on the open versions, of course) and BAM! Ship Windows