"By closely controlling the OS core, Microsoft will be able to better ensure that Longhorn will arrive on time and meet its quality and security objectives, Enderle said. He expects Longhorn to come out in the fourth quarter of 2005, provided that a beta becomes available as planned in 2004."
Looks like they're still looking at a 2006 release. (Come on, fourth quarter 2005 always means 2006).
The question is, will assembling this team help them meet that goal or will the initial organization of it take away some time and delay the project more?
I can't say from experience on what the effects of forming a new style of management to a project, no matter how capable that style is, will do as a project is underway but I'd assume there would be some hassles to start things off with and get the ball rolling.
They won't be going after you if you're downloading. They'll be going after you if you're sharing too much of what you downloaded. Which you in turn most likely had to obtain from someone uploading. So you indirectly may be putting people in a legally liable situation!!! haha.
I guess they want networks to become saturated with leechers. Then they can pick off the final people left sharing one by one.
I couldn't figure out whether this is the same patent or not. Maybe I missd something in the news article or the this article from optimas website: http://www.optimatech.com/settlefederalcase.html
It seems like they've won before against a "key macintosh software company". Who that is, I'm not sure.
Given that they have a direct link to the patent pdf on their homepage, I'd assume that is the one they are talking about. Since they've won a settlement before, does that give any more credibility to this claim once it hits the courts? If it ever does....
How about I rephrase it in a short burst for you straight from the horses mouth.
"I have not fully read the articles enough to feel I can make a judgement on the original authors intent and as such am taking the viewpoint that the original author may have just been ill-informed rather than the rebuttal authors viewpoint seems to be as his rebuttal ".
Now, summed up that shortly, it doesn't completely say what I wanted to say but since you insist on summing things up, there's the best I can do for right now.
Never once did I admit to knowing nothing. Simply that I hadn't fully read the articles. That doesn't mean I hadn't read the articles at all. It means that I felt I hadn't read them well enough to make a complete decision on whether author a was just running his mouth or whether he actually had a good point or whether he just thought he had a good point.
I don't know if I added anything of value to the discussion but I do know I said what I wanted to say and that's enough for me. That the original post generated some extra discussion is also a bonus. I'd rather a post of mine get -1: Flamebait and have 50 responses, half of them being interesting ones than get a post modded to +5: anything and have no responses at all to it.
Tone absolutely has a lot to do with it. However you can't safely assume more malice out of your example. Some people are just more blunt than others and don't doctor up their posts in hopes that most people won't be offended. They either don't care or don't realize that their tone can put people off sometimes.
You can make a reasonably justified assumption of malice out of the tone of the first article but you can't discount the fact that his malice is tied to lack of knowledge which is the point of my post.
Never let your enemies anger you and never hate your enemies. And don't always count people with differing opinions as your enemies.
B/c the point I was making wasn't directly tied to the content as much as people seem to think it was. That the rebuttal simply attributed what the orignal author said to be jealous zealotry and etc. can simply be explained by misinformation and lack of knowledge on the original authors part. I thought my post made it clear what it was about about but if not, there it is in black and white.
I can't speak for sure what the motives were of the man who wrote the original article but based on this quote from the rebuttal article:
"Had he done his homework instead of rushing to smear the Mac security community and fuel his Windows-based envy"
It seems that either he is a windows zealot ready to trounce anything non-windows or that the rebuttal author assumes this merely b/c he attacked Mac.
If it was the latter, don't make that assumption. Some people are just misinformed and like to go on spewing their mouths off on what they believe is exhaustively researched facts. There have been studies done in psychological research that shows how people who are misinformed tend to not know that they are misinformed (in fact, I think one paper was a story on slashdot at one point)
Not to say the original article was right (or wrong, never fully read it or the rebuttal) but it's shortsighted to assume criticism comes from zealous hate.
I see your point (though I wasn't trying to flamebait as the mods think, I'm just cranky in the morning;)) but at the same time I think it's a bit different from a regular coupon. If I get a coupon, there are generally no restrictions on the ability to use that coupon other than dates and purchase amounts. I've never got a coupon that said "Void if you use a Hummer to get to the store" which seems to be what your mozilla discount is implying. How the customer gets to the store, online or not, shouldn't be a factor in being rewarded I don't think.
So you're looking to punish people for not being informed enough to use something other than IE or Windows? Or even the person who uses Windows b/c they only have one machine and would rather not dual boot b/c they need to have Windows installed to run certain apps and feel that is enough for them? Or the person who is able to safely browse with IE and sees no need to go to another browser? Or how about the person that chooses Opera as their primary browser? Sounds like you're pushing what you want b/c *you* think it's the best solution and will have it no other way. Good way to run a store.
Ah, slashdot. Where you can make a post that is humorous but get modded up as interesting b/c you mentioned Linus Torvalds or anything closely resembling Linux.
"Apple went and released the 10.3 upgrade with a known remote-root vulnerability in it after having acknowledged the existence of the vulnerability."
That does seem to be the case however it's not a good reason in my eyes. They are on a monthly patch time cycle. This patch wasn't ready for the monthly patch so got delayed to next months. Seems simple and reasonable to me. If you can't fix something right, don't push it out in a half-fixed state.
"Except as provided below, Microsoft hereby grants you a royalty-free license under Microsoft's Necessary Claims to make, use, sell, offer to sell, import, and otherwise distribute Licensed Implementations solely for the purpose of reading and writing files that comply with the Microsoft specifications for the Office Schemas."
Maybe you were just trying for a quick mod up for being anti-MS. Maybe I missed something in what you're trying to say.
What?!?! We can't embrace and extend? That's the worst thing ever!
Besides, I think it was talking about just the schema and not necessarily any works that still abide by the schema but add some extra bells and whistles of their own. Which, as I recall, was a bad thing?? Or is it a good thing today? I get so confused.
You know what else we need? Every reformed joe from whatever group they used to be part of starting to preach to everyone else on the horrors and dangers of said group. This also comes at the expense of providing said reformed person with what they feel is reason to provide knee-jerk reactions to anything remotely resembling the group they were once in.
This article was laid out well, provided a set of icons illustrating what he thought they should be and went over other examples of what he felt were wrong and how to fix them. Notice that? He didn't just bitch and moan, he gave reasoning and advice.
His icons I thought were quite nice though I would have changed the mail one to look like an envelope more so than a document though I undertand his reasons for doing so. But that's just me as an apparent "armchair developer" isn't it?
Actually that wouldn't quite work though it's close. If it were MINIE that would have to stand for MINIE Is Not IE. Thus the recursive nature stays in the acronym
Slashdot Mirror
Well the 2.6 kernel is a pretty important release actually. It's the first major upgrade since 2.4 came out way back in 2001.
It ups it's multiprocessor limits to become more suitable for stock-trade and banking apps and it improves it's storage capabilities.
It really seems like this kernel should help completely solidify it's hold in the server market and gain even more of the market share.
"By closely controlling the OS core, Microsoft will be able to better ensure that Longhorn will arrive on time and meet its quality and security objectives, Enderle said. He expects Longhorn to come out in the fourth quarter of 2005, provided that a beta becomes available as planned in 2004."
Looks like they're still looking at a 2006 release. (Come on, fourth quarter 2005 always means 2006).
The question is, will assembling this team help them meet that goal or will the initial organization of it take away some time and delay the project more?
I can't say from experience on what the effects of forming a new style of management to a project, no matter how capable that style is, will do as a project is underway but I'd assume there would be some hassles to start things off with and get the ball rolling.
Yup, that's pretty much the clear mud of it. And yes, the levies did just go up but not as much as everyone feared it may be.
s tory/ROC/20031212/2003-12-13T002411Z_01_N12402633_ RTRIDST_0_BUSINESS-MEDIA-CANADA-COPYRIGHT-COL
http://www.globeinvestor.com/servlet/ArticleNews/
They won't be going after you if you're downloading. They'll be going after you if you're sharing too much of what you downloaded. Which you in turn most likely had to obtain from someone uploading. So you indirectly may be putting people in a legally liable situation!!! haha.
I guess they want networks to become saturated with leechers. Then they can pick off the final people left sharing one by one.
I couldn't figure out whether this is the same patent or not. Maybe I missd something in the news article or the this article from optimas website: http://www.optimatech.com/settlefederalcase.html
It seems like they've won before against a "key macintosh software company". Who that is, I'm not sure.
Given that they have a direct link to the patent pdf on their homepage, I'd assume that is the one they are talking about. Since they've won a settlement before, does that give any more credibility to this claim once it hits the courts? If it ever does....
How about I rephrase it in a short burst for you straight from the horses mouth.
"I have not fully read the articles enough to feel I can make a judgement on the original authors intent and as such am taking the viewpoint that the original author may have just been ill-informed rather than the rebuttal authors viewpoint seems to be as his rebuttal ".
Now, summed up that shortly, it doesn't completely say what I wanted to say but since you insist on summing things up, there's the best I can do for right now.
Never once did I admit to knowing nothing. Simply that I hadn't fully read the articles. That doesn't mean I hadn't read the articles at all. It means that I felt I hadn't read them well enough to make a complete decision on whether author a was just running his mouth or whether he actually had a good point or whether he just thought he had a good point.
I don't know if I added anything of value to the discussion but I do know I said what I wanted to say and that's enough for me. That the original post generated some extra discussion is also a bonus. I'd rather a post of mine get -1: Flamebait and have 50 responses, half of them being interesting ones than get a post modded to +5: anything and have no responses at all to it.
Tone absolutely has a lot to do with it. However you can't safely assume more malice out of your example. Some people are just more blunt than others and don't doctor up their posts in hopes that most people won't be offended. They either don't care or don't realize that their tone can put people off sometimes.
You can make a reasonably justified assumption of malice out of the tone of the first article but you can't discount the fact that his malice is tied to lack of knowledge which is the point of my post.
Never let your enemies anger you and never hate your enemies. And don't always count people with differing opinions as your enemies.
"See, that wasn't too hard, was it?"
Nope, it was just unecessary to the point I was trying to make.
B/c the point I was making wasn't directly tied to the content as much as people seem to think it was. That the rebuttal simply attributed what the orignal author said to be jealous zealotry and etc. can simply be explained by misinformation and lack of knowledge on the original authors part. I thought my post made it clear what it was about about but if not, there it is in black and white.
I can't speak for sure what the motives were of the man who wrote the original article but based on this quote from the rebuttal article:
"Had he done his homework instead of rushing to smear the Mac security community and fuel his Windows-based envy"
It seems that either he is a windows zealot ready to trounce anything non-windows or that the rebuttal author assumes this merely b/c he attacked Mac.
If it was the latter, don't make that assumption. Some people are just misinformed and like to go on spewing their mouths off on what they believe is exhaustively researched facts. There have been studies done in psychological research that shows how people who are misinformed tend to not know that they are misinformed (in fact, I think one paper was a story on slashdot at one point)
Not to say the original article was right (or wrong, never fully read it or the rebuttal) but it's shortsighted to assume criticism comes from zealous hate.
I see your point (though I wasn't trying to flamebait as the mods think, I'm just cranky in the morning ;)) but at the same time I think it's a bit different from a regular coupon. If I get a coupon, there are generally no restrictions on the ability to use that coupon other than dates and purchase amounts. I've never got a coupon that said "Void if you use a Hummer to get to the store" which seems to be what your mozilla discount is implying. How the customer gets to the store, online or not, shouldn't be a factor in being rewarded I don't think.
So you're looking to punish people for not being informed enough to use something other than IE or Windows? Or even the person who uses Windows b/c they only have one machine and would rather not dual boot b/c they need to have Windows installed to run certain apps and feel that is enough for them? Or the person who is able to safely browse with IE and sees no need to go to another browser? Or how about the person that chooses Opera as their primary browser? Sounds like you're pushing what you want b/c *you* think it's the best solution and will have it no other way. Good way to run a store.
Or maybe the more non-MS operating systems people see flop, the more inclined they will be to stay with MS.
"I'm feeling more American every day."
:)
*slow motion scream* Noooooo!!!! Stay away from the 'light'!
Ah, slashdot. Where you can make a post that is humorous but get modded up as interesting b/c you mentioned Linus Torvalds or anything closely resembling Linux.
"Apple went and released the 10.3 upgrade with a known remote-root vulnerability in it after having acknowledged the existence of the vulnerability."
That does seem to be the case however it's not a good reason in my eyes. They are on a monthly patch time cycle. This patch wasn't ready for the monthly patch so got delayed to next months. Seems simple and reasonable to me. If you can't fix something right, don't push it out in a half-fixed state.
Well when they've had 48 days already I don't know how much a slashdotting can help
But when do you draw the line at repairing an old one and building a new state of the art one?
Did you read the licence?
n tlicense.asp
From: http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/format/xmlpate
"Except as provided below, Microsoft hereby grants you a royalty-free license under Microsoft's Necessary Claims to make, use, sell, offer to sell, import, and otherwise distribute Licensed Implementations solely for the purpose of reading and writing files that comply with the Microsoft specifications for the Office Schemas."
Maybe you were just trying for a quick mod up for being anti-MS. Maybe I missed something in what you're trying to say.
Embrace and extend is the worst thing ever.
What?!?! We can't embrace and extend? That's the worst thing ever!
Besides, I think it was talking about just the schema and not necessarily any works that still abide by the schema but add some extra bells and whistles of their own. Which, as I recall, was a bad thing?? Or is it a good thing today? I get so confused.
No I'm pretty sure you are.
I think it might be in reference to Gene Hackman's character in Enemy of the State.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120660/
You know what else we need? Every reformed joe from whatever group they used to be part of starting to preach to everyone else on the horrors and dangers of said group. This also comes at the expense of providing said reformed person with what they feel is reason to provide knee-jerk reactions to anything remotely resembling the group they were once in.
This article was laid out well, provided a set of icons illustrating what he thought they should be and went over other examples of what he felt were wrong and how to fix them. Notice that? He didn't just bitch and moan, he gave reasoning and advice.
His icons I thought were quite nice though I would have changed the mail one to look like an envelope more so than a document though I undertand his reasons for doing so. But that's just me as an apparent "armchair developer" isn't it?
Get over it.
Actually that wouldn't quite work though it's close. If it were MINIE that would have to stand for MINIE Is Not IE. Thus the recursive nature stays in the acronym