MS has been found to be a predatory monopolist? Granted, Be could have filed after the appeals court upheld the FoF in the USDOJ case, but these things take time...
Be can now use the fact that MS is a convicted predatory monopolist as part of their case.
Note: Given recent mail delivery interruptions in Washington, DC, and current uncertainties involving the resumption of timely mail service, the Department of Justice strongly encourages that comments be submitted via e-mail or fax.
Perhaps it is time for the Government to create, adopt or otherwise standadize a system to allow registered voters to discuss and debate on current issues and policies.
Something like Slashdot, but the people who run the show would be our elected politicans instead of our current dictatorship:-)
And on the floor of the US Senate:
"Mr. President Pro Tem, I would like to point out that many of my constituents are 1337 h4xx0r5 and want the president to post his rear end in a "goatse.cx-ian" manner!
Plus we'd all have to boycott Harry Potter because of the eeeeevil eBook maker's coalition (ya know, that whole adobe, FBI, dmitri skylakarov, and DMCA stuff:)
Why? Yeah, DMCA evil.... oooh Shiny Harry Potter e-book!
I can't imagine hundreds of thousands of kids staying up late at night with laptops under their covers instead of the far more traditional book & flashlight
I'll be damned if my kids get a laptop before I get one, and I ain't getting one anytime soon!
However, as currently implemented, "party primaries" are public events. Public funds and resources (e.g. public polling places, registrar of voters, county clerk, etc...) are expended on them.
Therefore, the government of the states should be allowed to force the private bodies that these public resources benefit to allow non-members to have a say.
There is no way Pole Position had force feedback (at least the arcade version). I used to take the steering wheel and just spin it to take the hairpin.
Ada95. Only missing the MI thing (and maybe the IDE, but that's irrelevant, IMHO).
All the other posters have pretty much nailed your problem: The Boss(tm) is specifying implementation, not requirements. You need to determine what you're trying to do before you actually spec out the language(s). And <AOL TYPE=ME-TOO>your boss is simply throwing in every single buzzword he's ever heard.</AOL>
Further, who says you need only ONE language: Example: in a previous life, we had to do some Windows code, using a custom third party ActiveX control. Hence, we did the UI in VB, and the backend code in C/C++.
Legally it's quite a shrewd manuever to launch the offensive against a smaller target. BT can bully Prodigy and get a settlement, or, if they go to court, they won't be fighting the endless hoardes of lawyers that a company like AOL would throw at it.
Except that Prodigy is owned by SBC, one of the Baby Bells. They've got tons of bucks and lawyers.
You're supposed to go after a small fry evil hacker first, so as to set a precedent.
Instead, BT is going after Prodigy, who is owned by SBC, one of the three remaining "Baby Bells", who certainly has enough ca$h to defend themselves properly.
P.S. No offense to Mr. Corley or 2600 with the "small fry" remark. It referred strictly to company size/resources.
When I was in college (more years ago than I care to mention), those "Public Interest Research Groups" used an opt-out for funding. Yep... CalPIRG and MoPIRG got my money automatically from the university (UCSC and Wash. U, respectively) unless I explicitly opted out.
My comment largely centered on possible antitrust comments in upgrades. For example, there is nothing stopping MS from doing things in "required" upgrades, such as shutting down competitive dual boots [Win2k], applications, &c. Upgrades and retail versions should be subject to the same technical restrictions as OEM versions viz Abiltity to not install assorted middleware, honouring multi-boots, etc.
My comments were about the loopholes for MS regarding competitors' business model. Remember, the RPFJ allowed MS to discriminate against ISVs, if MS didn't think they had a viable business model (emphasis mine). Given that MS's belief in open source as a business model is well known (see Craig Mundie or Jim Allchin), plus the fact that not all people trying to be compatible with "MS Middleware" are even businesses to begin with, I found that portion of the RPFJ to be particularly heinous (though I didn't use that word).
Slashdot Mirror
MS has been found to be a predatory monopolist? Granted, Be could have filed after the appeals court upheld the FoF in the USDOJ case, but these things take time...
Be can now use the fact that MS is a convicted predatory monopolist as part of their case.
Specter is R-PA.
You're thinking of Orrin Hatch (R-UT), who took the RIAA to task over their interpretations of the DMCA (not that it resulted in anything happening).
From the comment solicitation page:
(emphasis DOJ's).
ACT is well known to be an MS front, I believe the CMDC is as well.
Yes, they "loosed" quite a bit of ordinance on Afghanistan.
On the other hand, if you were discussing them "losing" equipment, then your link is relevant.
Perhaps it is time for the Government to create, adopt or otherwise standadize a system to allow registered voters to discuss and debate on current issues and policies.
:-)
Something like Slashdot, but the people who run the show would be our elected politicans instead of our current dictatorship
And on the floor of the US Senate:
"Mr. President Pro Tem, I would like to point out that many of my constituents are 1337 h4xx0r5 and want the president to post his rear end in a "goatse.cx-ian" manner!
Good point. If I had a reader of some sort, I'd be willing to pay extra for a bundle of the deadtree version and the e-book.
There needs to be some sort of model similar to that with MP3: buy the physical copy because you like it... rip to e-media for personal use only.
You forgot "the earth would stop spinning and we'd be thrown into space", and "a plague of locusts o'er the land". (With apologies to Scott Adams).
Plus we'd all have to boycott Harry Potter because of the eeeeevil eBook maker's coalition (ya know, that whole adobe, FBI, dmitri skylakarov, and DMCA stuff :)
Why? Yeah, DMCA evil.... oooh Shiny Harry Potter e-book!
In a previous life, I worked on the e-book for the B-2 Spirit maintenance manuals... not the content, just the mechanism.
We had some nasty environmental and operating requirements, too... My favorite was the explosive atmosphere test!
Not that fond of html, since it makes books bulky (IMHO).
Yep, that DVD-ROM is sure bulkier than that CD-ROM!
I can't imagine hundreds of thousands of kids staying up late at night with laptops under their covers instead of the far more traditional book & flashlight
I'll be damned if my kids get a laptop before I get one, and I ain't getting one anytime soon!
And the entire source code is full of comments that read:
"You are not expected to understand this".
How is this different from what they do in the software world?
However, as currently implemented, "party primaries" are public events. Public funds and resources (e.g. public polling places, registrar of voters, county clerk, etc...) are expended on them.
Therefore, the government of the states should be allowed to force the private bodies that these public resources benefit to allow non-members to have a say.
That's cuz they didn't want a repeat of 91 (92?) when they wound up nominating "Beauty and the Beast" for Best Picture.
There is no way Pole Position had force feedback (at least the arcade version). I used to take the steering wheel and just spin it to take the hairpin.
Ada95. Only missing the MI thing (and maybe the IDE, but that's irrelevant, IMHO).
All the other posters have pretty much nailed your problem: The Boss(tm) is specifying implementation, not requirements. You need to determine what you're trying to do before you actually spec out the language(s). And <AOL TYPE=ME-TOO>your boss is simply throwing in every single buzzword he's ever heard.</AOL>
Further, who says you need only ONE language: Example: in a previous life, we had to do some Windows code, using a custom third party ActiveX control. Hence, we did the UI in VB, and the backend code in C/C++.
Legally it's quite a shrewd manuever to launch the offensive against a smaller target. BT can bully Prodigy and get a settlement, or, if they go to court, they won't be fighting the endless hoardes of lawyers that a company like AOL would throw at it.
Except that Prodigy is owned by SBC, one of the Baby Bells. They've got tons of bucks and lawyers.
BT doesn't even know how to do it right...
You're supposed to go after a small fry evil hacker first, so as to set a precedent.
Instead, BT is going after Prodigy, who is owned by SBC, one of the three remaining "Baby Bells", who certainly has enough ca$h to defend themselves properly.
P.S. No offense to Mr. Corley or 2600 with the "small fry" remark. It referred strictly to company size/resources.
When I was in college (more years ago than I care to mention), those "Public Interest Research Groups" used an opt-out for funding. Yep... CalPIRG and MoPIRG got my money automatically from the university (UCSC and Wash. U, respectively) unless I explicitly opted out.
So much for the "Public Interest".
Me too. I won a copy of BCB5 Pro in their online contest. Where do I get my receipt?
Not to mention the DoD, if you do any classified work!
My comment largely centered on possible antitrust comments in upgrades. For example, there is nothing stopping MS from doing things in "required" upgrades, such as shutting down competitive dual boots [Win2k], applications, &c. Upgrades and retail versions should be subject to the same technical restrictions as OEM versions viz Abiltity to not install assorted middleware, honouring multi-boots, etc.
My comments were about the loopholes for MS regarding competitors' business model. Remember, the RPFJ allowed MS to discriminate against ISVs, if MS didn't think they had a viable business model (emphasis mine). Given that MS's belief in open source as a business model is well known (see Craig Mundie or Jim Allchin), plus the fact that not all people trying to be compatible with "MS Middleware" are even businesses to begin with, I found that portion of the RPFJ to be particularly heinous (though I didn't use that word).
I submitted to the Calif. AG, and subsequently under the Tunney Act to the DOJ.
I wrote my congressman about Sklyarov, Felten and the DMCA.
I spoke to him (very briefly) after he gave a talk at my synagogue.