thats only in the IBM case and only covers attorney's fee, anything else is out of SCO's pocket, they are still paying for the REdhat, Autozone, and Novell suits and any of the extras like experts they hire etc comes straight out of there cash hoard
'Analysts' have been predicting this for years, saying its cheaper, more flexable, etc. Apple has too buch invested PPC, if Apple switched to x86 EVERY program on the current platform that is optimized for PPC would have to be reworked to run on x86. That and Apple has too much of a proformace advantage with t he G5.
Not only is the article well written, but he shows the pattarn of innfingment, throughout MXS's current product line, future products, and past programs 'alegedly' written my Arben. At the bottum of the article (if you can get that far without geting just digusted with MXS) he mentions PDFConv which was a blantent ripoff of PDF2HTML. I certianally hope that all the projects that he contacted in his investigation attempt some form of legal recourse. Even if Jim Krates and Arben is loaded with cash, they will soon run out if everyone that was wronged files a seperate suit in seperate states, forcing them to have to fight mutiple battles simultaneously. Just look at the drain on SCOXs finances with their sue the world campain.
The only problem with this logic is that widgets only run when the widget layer is running, widgets do not run in the background, otherwise there would be a resource crunch with all the widgets running on some peoples systems. Little experiment proves this.
Open Activity monitor or run top from the terminal, note the sustained CPU usage. Now bring up the widget layer, note the increase in sustained CPU usage. Even if someone installed an invible data mining widget, the only time it would run is when the user brings up the widget layer.
Using Tiger and checked the site, the widget zip file auto downloads but won't unzip and install with the box unchecked. This isn't a security flaw, is a cleaver use of default settings, and as for the essaiest wanting a way to uninstall widgets, just open the the widegets folder and drag the any unwanted widgets to the treash, empty trash, repeat as nessessary.
The ion's flow is no longer operating correctly, thereby reducing battery life.
The heat due to charging-discharging cycles and the movement and accumulation of ions to the electrodes causes a mechanical alteration in volume (expansion + contraction) for a approximative value of 7-9% of the total volume.
The mechanical stress causes the partial decomposition of the electrodes and metal particles float within the electrolyte. These uncharged metal particles cannot be ionized anymore.
The wavelength of the electron released from BatMax is around 3-40 microns, and is considered to be within almost the same range with the oscillation frequency of molecules inside the battery. These molecules are able to raise their oscillation energy and electricity generation by receiving electron wavelength from BatMax.
BatMax contains permeable material, which is able to directly affect the molecule level inside the battery and BatMax reintegrates the uncharged particles into the electrical circuit. BatMax reduces electrical loss by optimizing the ions transfers between the battery cells and maintaining a stable voltage.
BatMax dissolves and helps to prevent the crystalline formation caused by the oxidation, so the electrons can move freely between the anode and cathode and the battery recovers the same performance as a new one. BatMax improve the electrolytic conductivity for a better ions flow and reactivate the inactive and uncharged particles.
BatMax unblocks and regulates the flow of ions by generating an electro-magnetic cavity and oscillation frequency with negative ions emission. The ionization generated by BatMax has been mesured as a level reaching 30 times the value (7 - 8.000 Ions/cm3) of the ambiant air ionization (2 - 300 Ions/cm3). By the ions production, BatMax improves the electrodes oxidization.
BatMax starts its effect on the battery just after installation and users will notice an increase in battery life and charging speed, after 5 to 10 charging cycles.
A battery does not generate waves. It might create a small magnetic field when current is drawn from the battery (like any cable does when it carries an electrical current).
Anyway, why is that field harmful and needs to be absorbed? Pure FUD, apart from the point that I sincerely doubt some "ceramic nanomaterial" is suitable for absorbing magnetic fields.
Any device that uses or produces electricity produces electromagnetic waves. Otherwise known as EMF and EMI.
Also they never said that they were bad and need to be absorbed. The material reflects the waves back into the battery at a different frequency to increase battery preformance. That is why the IonX material is sandwiched between 2 layers of silcon and produces a small negitve charge.
Unlikely, batteries have air-and watertight cases. How would the thingy act through that barrier? No explanation is given.
Electromagnetic waves can penetrate the air-and-watertight case of any battery. If they can come out then they can go back in again.
...Cowboy Neal INAEE (Is not an electrical engineer)
I may not be an electrcal engineer either, but it was my major for two years before moving into Computer science and it sound intirely possible to me.
FUD? no, Clever marketing? Yes, Workable product? Yet to be determined, but for 12 bucks worth a shot.
Of these support calls how many were "how do I change my wall paper", "Where is 'My Computer'", "How do I make a short cut", "I can't eject the cdrom", and other such requests that would normaly come from a person that has used nothing but MicroCrap there whole computing life. I work for a school district with 75% mac, we have 2 admins, one for our legacy OS 9 stuff and the other for OSX, we have two full time mac repair techs and 2 that that do both pc and mac. We have 16 techs for PC repair and 4 people for the Administration. This is for over 5000 computers total both mac and PC.
Where is the TCO savings? Lets see 6 people to support 3750 Macs and 20 people to Support 1250 PC's With the average cost of 166k/yr (three admins for 500k/yr) per employee from the Parent post, the cost per unit to support is
Mac is $265.60 per year PC is $2656.00 per year
Support for the macs is one tenth the cost of the PCs. There is your cost savings. This is based on real numbers of employees and Computers. You do the math and prove me wrong.
Side note, I started of in PC only support and moved to Mac only. Mac is much easier to learn and to support. Yes Macs crach but a hell of lot less often the PC's do.
I've been ussing bob@bob.bob and a@a.a to qutie some sucess for many years. Figuring the code that accepts the address is mearly looking for xxx@yyy.zzz
Apple is mearly defending there copy protection mechinism(sp), most likly a requirment in the sea of contracts that Apple has with the RIAA and its affiliats, though I do not agree with using the C&D with the DMCA instead of a normal C&D. You must remember that Apples DRM is is the most liberal out there, allowing you to burn multiple CD's (which can still be ripped into MP3's) and transfer AAC Files to a back up and restore.
I don't see this as any type of strong arm tactic by Apple to "put the little guy down" just protecting an updated bussiness model. Without ITMS no more iPod sales, which means no more street muggings (maybe this is a good dthing after all)
Correction, The Legal system worked THIS time. It's still FUBAR, but the judge assigned to SCO vs IBM suit at least seems to realize that IBM can't defend itself with out knowing what it did wrong. SCO is fishing for evidince (if not more) sorta like when your mother used to say you were in trouble and then would ask you what you though you did wrong and get you to confess to something total different to what you were orginaly in trouble for.
SCO is sending out Invoices to commercial Linux users. Seems that asking wasn't enough. See http://www.zdnet.com.au/newstech/os/story/0,2 00004 8630,20277173,00.htm
I was reading ibm's countersuit. The interesting part about the suit is that IBM put nearly everything that/. has been harping about for the last 5 months. It looks like the folks at IBM really do read/.
The reason for IBM to only counter sue with four patents is really simple. 1:1 for the patents and the infinging code. "I'll give a free liceance to use our patent and you give me the rights to my software. If not then let lets see here what else do I have in my little majic bag to smack you with"
BM said that four SCO software packages violate four of IBM's patents. The patents cover a data compression technique, a method of navigating among program menus using options arranged in a graphical tree, a method for verifying that an electronic message was received and a method for monitoring computing systems linked in a cluster.
Everyone buy ONE, thats right one stock. Wait for the next shareholder meating(this will work because the lawsuit is going to drag on forever anyway) then force the arses on the board to drop the lawsuit and or off the board of directors.
I think that I fugured this mess out. SCO is claiming ownership of UNIX and related IP. They resenlty clearified this and are now claiming derived works of System V. Including AIX, SQI and others, with a not so direct threat against Microsoft. (Not that I really care there) Now, I have never personaly used UNIXware OR Openserver, But I can still deduce that AIX is better. Since IBM won't settle this, SCO wants AIX. They want to control it, sell it, make all the money for it. They would do the same to Sun but it is asumed that they have a Licence to distribute Solaris, therefore SCO is getting paid for it. With the latest round of FUD in the books, it seems to me that SCO is simply tring to gooble up the UNIX world, hence the threats to sue Linus, the want the rights to Linux as well.
One Company, Under UNIX, With Represion, and Injustice for all.
...its improved in many areas, which is good. But after AOL took over it has lost much of its appeal. Now I primaly use AIM, only cause thats what many of my friends(Yes, I have friends) use. Now I can run one program and talk to both, wahoo!
Yeah, your right, SCO hold the copyright and conrols the source. But if there code was misappropriated and placed under the GPL like they claim then then they should have stopped distributing the kernel and any other affected code. since they alleged IBM and then continued to distibute the kernel, then they forfit those rights as copyright holder. They redistibuted code knowing that there were infractions. Its similar to purcasing stolen goods, even if you don't know its stolen when you bought it, you still forfit the goods when you are discovered to be in possesion of them, if not arrested for recieving stolen property.
Slashdot Mirror
thats only in the IBM case and only covers attorney's fee, anything else is out of SCO's pocket, they are still paying for the REdhat, Autozone, and Novell suits and any of the extras like experts they hire etc comes straight out of there cash hoard
'Analysts' have been predicting this for years, saying its cheaper, more flexable, etc. Apple has too buch invested PPC, if Apple switched to x86 EVERY program on the current platform that is optimized for PPC would have to be reworked to run on x86. That and Apple has too much of a proformace advantage with t he G5.
Not only is the article well written, but he shows the pattarn of innfingment, throughout MXS's current product line, future products, and past programs 'alegedly' written my Arben. At the bottum of the article (if you can get that far without geting just digusted with MXS) he mentions PDFConv which was a blantent ripoff of PDF2HTML. I certianally hope that all the projects that he contacted in his investigation attempt some form of legal recourse. Even if Jim Krates and Arben is loaded with cash, they will soon run out if everyone that was wronged files a seperate suit in seperate states, forcing them to have to fight mutiple battles simultaneously. Just look at the drain on SCOXs finances with their sue the world campain.
The only problem with this logic is that widgets only run when the widget layer is running, widgets do not run in the background, otherwise there would be a resource crunch with all the widgets running on some peoples systems. Little experiment proves this.
Open Activity monitor or run top from the terminal, note the sustained CPU usage. Now bring up the widget layer, note the increase in sustained CPU usage. Even if someone installed an invible data mining widget, the only time it would run is when the user brings up the widget layer.
Using Tiger and checked the site, the widget zip file auto downloads but won't unzip and install with the box unchecked. This isn't a security flaw, is a cleaver use of default settings, and as for the essaiest wanting a way to uninstall widgets, just open the the widegets folder and drag the any unwanted widgets to the treash, empty trash, repeat as nessessary.
Thinksecret ring a bell?
Redhat did, effectivly, do just that when it asked for a declaration of non-infringment but the case is stayed pending the IBM lawsuit
The ion's flow is no longer operating correctly, thereby reducing battery life.
The heat due to charging-discharging cycles and the movement and accumulation of ions to the electrodes causes a mechanical alteration in volume (expansion + contraction) for a approximative value of 7-9% of the total volume.
The mechanical stress causes the partial decomposition of the electrodes and metal particles float within the electrolyte. These uncharged metal particles cannot be ionized anymore.
The wavelength of the electron released from BatMax is around 3-40 microns, and is considered to be within almost the same range with the oscillation frequency of molecules inside the battery. These molecules are able to raise their oscillation energy and electricity generation by receiving electron wavelength from BatMax.
BatMax contains permeable material, which is able to directly affect the molecule level inside the battery and BatMax reintegrates the uncharged particles into the electrical circuit.
BatMax reduces electrical loss by optimizing the ions transfers between the battery cells and maintaining a stable voltage.
BatMax dissolves and helps to prevent the crystalline formation caused by the oxidation, so the electrons can move freely between the anode and cathode and the battery recovers the same performance as a new one. BatMax improve the electrolytic conductivity for a better ions flow and reactivate the inactive and uncharged particles.
BatMax unblocks and regulates the flow of ions by generating an electro-magnetic cavity and oscillation frequency with negative ions emission. The ionization generated by BatMax has been mesured as a level reaching 30 times the value (7 - 8.000 Ions/cm3) of the ambiant air ionization (2 - 300 Ions/cm3). By the ions production, BatMax improves the electrodes oxidization.
BatMax starts its effect on the battery just after installation and users will notice an increase in battery life
and charging speed, after 5 to 10 charging cycles.
©Tech-Blog.org
A battery does not generate waves. It might create a small magnetic field when current is drawn from the battery (like any cable does when it carries an electrical current). Anyway, why is that field harmful and needs to be absorbed? Pure FUD, apart from the point that I sincerely doubt some "ceramic nanomaterial" is suitable for absorbing magnetic fields.
...Cowboy Neal INAEE (Is not an electrical engineer)
Any device that uses or produces electricity produces electromagnetic waves. Otherwise known as EMF and EMI.
Also they never said that they were bad and need to be absorbed. The material reflects the waves back into the battery at a different frequency to increase battery preformance. That is why the IonX material is sandwiched between 2 layers of silcon and produces a small negitve charge.
Unlikely, batteries have air-and watertight cases. How would the thingy act through that barrier? No explanation is given.
Electromagnetic waves can penetrate the air-and-watertight case of any battery. If they can come out then they can go back in again.
I may not be an electrcal engineer either, but it was my major for two years before moving into Computer science and it sound intirely possible to me.
FUD? no, Clever marketing? Yes, Workable product? Yet to be determined, but for 12 bucks worth a shot.
Of these support calls how many were "how do I change my wall paper", "Where is 'My Computer'", "How do I make a short cut", "I can't eject the cdrom", and other such requests that would normaly come from a person that has used nothing but MicroCrap there whole computing life. I work for a school district with 75% mac, we have 2 admins, one for our legacy OS 9 stuff and the other for OSX, we have two full time mac repair techs and 2 that that do both pc and mac. We have 16 techs for PC repair and 4 people for the Administration. This is for over 5000 computers total both mac and PC.
Where is the TCO savings? Lets see 6 people to support 3750 Macs and 20 people to Support 1250 PC's With the average cost of 166k/yr (three admins for 500k/yr) per employee from the Parent post, the cost per unit to support is
Mac is $265.60 per year
PC is $2656.00 per year
Support for the macs is one tenth the cost of the PCs. There is your cost savings. This is based on real numbers of employees and Computers. You do the math and prove me wrong.
Side note, I started of in PC only support and moved to Mac only. Mac is much easier to learn and to support. Yes Macs crach but a hell of lot less often the PC's do.
I've been ussing bob@bob.bob and a@a.a to qutie some sucess for many years. Figuring the code that accepts the address is mearly looking for xxx@yyy.zzz
Apple is mearly defending there copy protection mechinism(sp), most likly a requirment in the sea of contracts that Apple has with the RIAA and its affiliats, though I do not agree with using the C&D with the DMCA instead of a normal C&D. You must remember that Apples DRM is is the most liberal out there, allowing you to burn multiple CD's (which can still be ripped into MP3's) and transfer AAC Files to a back up and restore.
I don't see this as any type of strong arm tactic by Apple to "put the little guy down" just protecting an updated bussiness model. Without ITMS no more iPod sales, which means no more street muggings (maybe this is a good dthing after all)
SoSu Me
Correction, The Legal system worked THIS time. It's still FUBAR, but the judge assigned to SCO vs IBM suit at least seems to realize that IBM can't defend itself with out knowing what it did wrong. SCO is fishing for evidince (if not more) sorta like when your mother used to say you were in trouble and then would ask you what you though you did wrong and get you to confess to something total different to what you were orginaly in trouble for.
Come on you ninnies, it only took me 10 tries to download the file. You can do better then this. Slame the AOL server. Make them earn there money.
SCO is sending out Invoices to commercial Linux users. Seems that asking wasn't enough. See2 00004 8630,20277173,00.htm
http://www.zdnet.com.au/newstech/os/story/0,
I was reading ibm's countersuit. The interesting part about the suit is that IBM put nearly everything that /. has been harping about for the last 5 months. It looks like the folks at IBM really do read /.
The reason for IBM to only counter sue with four patents is really simple. 1:1 for the patents and the infinging code. "I'll give a free liceance to use our patent and you give me the rights to my software. If not then let lets see here what else do I have in my little majic bag to smack you with"
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5060965.html?tag= fdfeed
BM said that four SCO software packages violate four of IBM's patents. The patents cover a data compression technique, a method of navigating among program menus using options arranged in a graphical tree, a method for verifying that an electronic message was received and a method for monitoring computing systems linked in a cluster.
Everyone buy ONE, thats right one stock. Wait for the next shareholder meating(this will work because the lawsuit is going to drag on forever anyway) then force the arses on the board to drop the lawsuit and or off the board of directors.
hey it might work
I thought that Handspring got bought out by Palm?
I think that I fugured this mess out. SCO is claiming ownership of UNIX and related IP. They resenlty clearified this and are now claiming derived works of System V. Including AIX, SQI and others, with a not so direct threat against Microsoft. (Not that I really care there) Now, I have never personaly used UNIXware OR Openserver, But I can still deduce that AIX is better. Since IBM won't settle this, SCO wants AIX. They want to control it, sell it, make all the money for it. They would do the same to Sun but it is asumed that they have a Licence to distribute Solaris, therefore SCO is getting paid for it. With the latest round of FUD in the books, it seems to me that SCO is simply tring to gooble up the UNIX world, hence the threats to sue Linus, the want the rights to Linux as well.
One Company, Under UNIX, With Represion, and Injustice for all.
...its improved in many areas, which is good. But after AOL took over it has lost much of its appeal. Now I primaly use AIM, only cause thats what many of my friends(Yes, I have friends) use. Now I can run one program and talk to both, wahoo!
Just finished listening to the confrence call and found out 0 new information. Even during the QA they mearly repeated the press releases. Come on!.
Side noote: 4 million in profit huh!?! well thats gonna get eatten up in legal fees real quik.
Yeah, your right, SCO hold the copyright and conrols the source. But if there code was misappropriated and placed under the GPL like they claim then then they should have stopped distributing the kernel and any other affected code. since they alleged IBM and then continued to distibute the kernel, then they forfit those rights as copyright holder. They redistibuted code knowing that there were infractions. Its similar to purcasing stolen goods, even if you don't know its stolen when you bought it, you still forfit the goods when you are discovered to be in possesion of them, if not arrested for recieving stolen property.