Just when you thought it couldn't get any better:) It seems IBM is not alone in the artful game of reeling fools in. And Boies and Co. shrug and take the money home.
Best King Canute No Ocean's Gonna Stop Me Now Head In The Sand performance goes to.....(drum roll)
The United States of America!!! Woohoo!!
HA HA look they're still in character! No wait don't point that ICBM at me! Here, have some more oil! Nice superpower....
Re:My favorite in game humor... Warcraft/Starcraft
on
Humor in Games?
·
· Score: 1
This seems to have been a common thing to do in warcraft/warlords/baldurs gate/icewind dale.
Particularly good in the BG series is if you attempt to acquire Boo from Minsc. Minsc has a rather disturbing relationship with that hamster, and the repeated-click trick gives you some insight.
The temptation to keep old code to save the effort of reinventing the whole approach is very real. Most programmers maintain code, not originate it. So actually burying or burning the printout is more than just symbolic, it's a real attempt to shift the mindset. IMHO it's very needed.
Australians have been watching the blow-by-blow election results on TV for over 30 years, on the national broadcaster (pbs to you).
It's got so most of the commercial channels just run an update whenever it looks like there's a result, but if you want the gory details everyone knows where to go.
I used a wiki for a couple of years to track computer parts, upgrades, software and specific issues that might come up again. Much easier than a standard database setup, with the advantage that you can see relationships between data you may not have noticed before. Apply these concepts to a group and you've got something which can actually produce synergies and greatly improved results.
Put simply, if you have a large amount of heretogenous data and use a wiki to organize the group's thinking about it, you'll get something more useful more quickly.
And have to compete with Apple?! Don't be naive. And how do you explain writing off 20-odd years of investment in the NT base to shareholders? "It's all been a mistake, we should have used BSD" is NOT going to go over well. I did think they might have wanted Linux in the same way, but on reflection, I think all they want are algorithms and implementations, not to use the code itself per se. After all, they can already rip off BSD, it's just GPL code they can't steal.
It's obvious that MS could have used a BSD core, but that would mean writing off the NT base, and directly competing with Apple on a codebase Apple are miles ahead on. But if Microsoft can kill the GPL then it can OWN Linux code without paying court even to BSD egos. They always want the WHOLE thing, not just the bits you think they can have.
...but you'd be crazy to invest. Intel is in deep trouble unless Microsoft's next big thing convinces the Intel-lovers they need to upgrade. Microsoft is in deep trouble unless they convince the AMD-lovers they're not going to discriminate against them with said next big thing. R&D budgets are almost untenable. People are looking for ways to conserve their hardware, not madly buy more because Intel had a rollout.
The whole point of this is to protect the existing base, it's called due diligence. Pirate copies are free mindshare, they encourage it in "emergent markets". It's where the real money will be and is their true reason for fearing competitors.
As the anonymous MS poster said, it's the manufacturer's and resellers loyalty they're trying to shore up. Once that goes, they're really in trouble. Because then those resellers will not protect them in the new markets.
You're putting TELNET down if you think its importance was limited by security and bandwidth. TELNET was the original killer app of networking: its development led the original thinking about how much a network application should do vs. what the underlying network should do. It exposed many portability issues across different architectures and operating system environments. FTP has direct debts to TELNET, the whole concept of open protocols does. That paradigm has made the Internet the success it is. TELNET made the ARPANET and its Internet sucessor possible.
Most of this article just extrapolated corporate WishThink. The "inevitability" of the end of MS blissfully ignores the dependence of hardware manufacturers at one end, and the GUI-dependence of users at the other. Nor is the OS a done deal, and most of the "commoditization" of office apps is still Microsoft OS-based, whatever the attractions of OpenOffice/StarOffice.
I can't hammer this point enough: MS has a gatekeeper mentality because it IS the gatekeeper. That is what needs to change. If MS could shoot down the GPL, it would not hesitate to sell an MS shell over a linux core, if it can justify dumping the NT asset. Okay, that's two if's but they're realistic if's. Otherwise, MS will stay put and strong-arm everyone.
What linux needs is shrink-wrapped POS systems. Shrink-wrapped accounting/stock-management. Take out those dependencies and you'll get a huge slice of market share.
I'm sorry, but if you don't understand that MS are the gatekeepers, then I have a wonderful linux kernel for sale, going cheap. What computer-related mass market hardware is sold without the blessing of Microsoft? My friend, no blessing, no sale. Were you aware that mainboard bios's were forced to include code to cope with Microsoft's idea of APM for Win95? They were still borked for win98. Microsoft refused to fix their problem, the manufacturers had to rewrite their drivers instead. When you can do that, when upcoming OS versions virtually guarantee hardware upgrades, how can you not be the effective gatekeeper?
As for backward compatibility, that joke is so unfunny, I'll leave it as an exercise for you to google for the "backward compatibility" horror-stories over the years. Here's a hint: according to the Book of Gates, it's the users or the hardware manufacturers fault.
This is a tricky time for hardware manufacturers - how to promote upgrades which are essentially placeholders for a new hardware generation - and hope like hell that Microsoft will actually promote applications that will use that new functionality. Because Microsoft can afford to lose their R&D money, Intel and AMD cannot.
Don't get me wrong, I'm looking forward to true 64-bit dual core architectures on the PC platform, but unless something amazing happens in the next 12 months, Microsoft will again be the gatekeeper to the mass uptake of that hardware, geek rage and linux notwithstanding. The shark will get it's DRM when the makers are appropriately terrified, and even then they may not make their money back.
From a manufacturer/reseller point of view, it's not looking all that certain. Uncertainty is deadly to the CPU/mainboard market, and I'm seeing it in the hedged bets of computer swapmeets and resellers. The explosion of mp3 players, digital cameras, dvd burners and the astonshing fall in solid state memory might take up the slack for now, but that still means those crucial early-adopters aren't looking at the new goods.
Woopy-doo. I couldn't care less. Who gives a flying burrito? Irrelevant. Redundant. Pointless and expensive. Either blow it out of, or jam it out of, your bottom. Bollocks. Wake me up for the next reel.
If it's not too late for moderation, the parent is so ignorant I can only wonder how it was modded up at all unless there is a sea of profound ignorance out there.
Most moans about Neal's endings are primarily about the bits the moaners wanted to hear about and didn't, much like parent. Somehow parent expects a writer to expound on the state of the publishing industry, something that is extremely rare to hear from writers for some very good reasons (hint: career).
Parent doesn't understand the economics of bookshops although parent claims to have spent hours in one doing something mysterious and point to relatives who also apparently don't understand the economics of bookshops. This is apparently Neal's fault too.
Parent has obviously not read the Baroque Cycle or would have realized it is in part about the point at which in Western civilization money went from essentially tangible to essentially intangible. Apart from suggesting a study of economics, I'm not sure what parent expects of money beyond an intangible glue, perhaps credit-chip implants. What would be so original about that?
CEO's are always in denial mode. To be otherwise is perceived weakness and unwillingness to protect shareholder value. Denial assures shareholders that you are practicing due diligence. Blaming anyone and anything else externalizes costs. That's why it's always Apples' fault, or mostly the users. Hence the mantra of 'no software liability'. It's why OS's controlled by corporations will always be never-ending voids of other people's innovation and crap.
Slashdot Mirror
Just when you thought it couldn't get any better :)
It seems IBM is not alone in the artful game of reeling fools in. And Boies and Co. shrug and take the money home.
Game over, man, game over.
Every time I see an obfuscated code contest, I wonder if 'Winner' is the right word to describe the victor
I certainly feel like a loser when I read obfuscated code!
Best King Canute No Ocean's Gonna Stop Me Now Head In The Sand performance goes to.....(drum roll)
The United States of America!!! Woohoo!!
HA HA look they're still in character! No wait don't point that ICBM at me! Here, have some more oil! Nice superpower....
This seems to have been a common thing to do in warcraft/warlords/baldurs gate/icewind dale.
Particularly good in the BG series is if you attempt to acquire Boo from Minsc. Minsc has a rather disturbing relationship with that hamster, and the repeated-click trick gives you some insight.
I've heard of guerilla advertising, but isn't this going a bit far for the Half Life sequel?
:)
At least it will force CS off the radar for a change.
The temptation to keep old code to save the effort of reinventing the whole approach is very real. Most programmers maintain code, not originate it. So actually burying or burning the printout is more than just symbolic, it's a real attempt to shift the mindset. IMHO it's very needed.
Welcome to the New Feudalism, folks. And no, we're not with you. All those Americans, they look the same to us. Why bother?
Australians have been watching the blow-by-blow election results on TV for over 30 years, on the national broadcaster (pbs to you).
:)
It's got so most of the commercial channels just run an update whenever it looks like there's a result, but if you want the gory details everyone knows where to go.
Trust Americans to lose all perspective
I used a wiki for a couple of years to track computer parts, upgrades, software and specific issues that might come up again. Much easier than a standard database setup, with the advantage that you can see relationships between data you may not have noticed before. Apply these concepts to a group and you've got something which can actually produce synergies and greatly improved results.
Put simply, if you have a large amount of heretogenous data and use a wiki to organize the group's thinking about it, you'll get something more useful more quickly.
And have to compete with Apple?! Don't be naive. And how do you explain writing off 20-odd years of investment in the NT base to shareholders? "It's all been a mistake, we should have used BSD" is NOT going to go over well. I did think they might have wanted Linux in the same way, but on reflection, I think all they want are algorithms and implementations, not to use the code itself per se. After all, they can already rip off BSD, it's just GPL code they can't steal.
It's obvious that MS could have used a BSD core, but that would mean writing off the NT base, and directly competing with Apple on a codebase Apple are miles ahead on. But if Microsoft can kill the GPL then it can OWN Linux code without paying court even to BSD egos. They always want the WHOLE thing, not just the bits you think they can have.
...but you'd be crazy to invest. Intel is in deep trouble unless Microsoft's next big thing convinces the Intel-lovers they need to upgrade. Microsoft is in deep trouble unless they convince the AMD-lovers they're not going to discriminate against them with said next big thing. R&D budgets are almost untenable. People are looking for ways to conserve their hardware, not madly buy more because Intel had a rollout.
none of them use Windows!
The whole point of this is to protect the existing base, it's called due diligence. Pirate copies are free mindshare, they encourage it in "emergent markets". It's where the real money will be and is their true reason for fearing competitors.
As the anonymous MS poster said, it's the manufacturer's and resellers loyalty they're trying to shore up. Once that goes, they're really in trouble. Because then those resellers will not protect them in the new markets.
You're putting TELNET down if you think its importance was limited by security and bandwidth. TELNET was the original killer app of networking: its development led the original thinking about how much a network application should do vs. what the underlying network should do. It exposed many portability issues across different architectures and operating system environments. FTP has direct debts to TELNET, the whole concept of open protocols does. That paradigm has made the Internet the success it is. TELNET made the ARPANET and its Internet sucessor possible.
Most of this article just extrapolated corporate WishThink. The "inevitability" of the end of MS blissfully ignores the dependence of hardware manufacturers at one end, and the GUI-dependence of users at the other. Nor is the OS a done deal, and most of the "commoditization" of office apps is still Microsoft OS-based, whatever the attractions of OpenOffice/StarOffice.
I can't hammer this point enough: MS has a gatekeeper mentality because it IS the gatekeeper. That is what needs to change. If MS could shoot down the GPL, it would not hesitate to sell an MS shell over a linux core, if it can justify dumping the NT asset. Okay, that's two if's but they're realistic if's. Otherwise, MS will stay put and strong-arm everyone.
What linux needs is shrink-wrapped POS systems. Shrink-wrapped accounting/stock-management. Take out those dependencies and you'll get a huge slice of market share.
I'm sorry, but if you don't understand that MS are the gatekeepers, then I have a wonderful linux kernel for sale, going cheap. What computer-related mass market hardware is sold without the blessing of Microsoft? My friend, no blessing, no sale. Were you aware that mainboard bios's were forced to include code to cope with Microsoft's idea of APM for Win95? They were still borked for win98. Microsoft refused to fix their problem, the manufacturers had to rewrite their drivers instead. When you can do that, when upcoming OS versions virtually guarantee hardware upgrades, how can you not be the effective gatekeeper?
As for backward compatibility, that joke is so unfunny, I'll leave it as an exercise for you to google for the "backward compatibility" horror-stories over the years. Here's a hint: according to the Book of Gates, it's the users or the hardware manufacturers fault.
Is there a patch to fix it, or should I downgrade? Why aren't linux trojans given as much attention as their windows counterparts?
what Slashdot's next story will be?
Another blow for journalistic redundancy.
This is a tricky time for hardware manufacturers - how to promote upgrades which are essentially placeholders for a new hardware generation - and hope like hell that Microsoft will actually promote applications that will use that new functionality. Because Microsoft can afford to lose their R&D money, Intel and AMD cannot.
Don't get me wrong, I'm looking forward to true 64-bit dual core architectures on the PC platform, but unless something amazing happens in the next 12 months, Microsoft will again be the gatekeeper to the mass uptake of that hardware, geek rage and linux notwithstanding. The shark will get it's DRM when the makers are appropriately terrified, and even then they may not make their money back.
From a manufacturer/reseller point of view, it's not looking all that certain. Uncertainty is deadly to the CPU/mainboard market, and I'm seeing it in the hedged bets of computer swapmeets and resellers. The explosion of mp3 players, digital cameras, dvd burners and the astonshing fall in solid state memory might take up the slack for now, but that still means those crucial early-adopters aren't looking at the new goods.
We live in interesting times.
sounds like an eminem takeoff, i don't know who it is. put a beat on it and rock our world.
Woopy-doo. I couldn't care less. Who gives a flying burrito? Irrelevant. Redundant. Pointless and expensive. Either blow it out of, or jam it out of, your bottom. Bollocks. Wake me up for the next reel.
If it's not too late for moderation, the parent is so ignorant I can only wonder how it was modded up at all unless there is a sea of profound ignorance out there.
Most moans about Neal's endings are primarily about the bits the moaners wanted to hear about and didn't, much like parent. Somehow parent expects a writer to expound on the state of the publishing industry, something that is extremely rare to hear from writers for some very good reasons (hint: career).
Parent doesn't understand the economics of bookshops although parent claims to have spent hours in one doing something mysterious and point to relatives who also apparently don't understand the economics of bookshops. This is apparently Neal's fault too.
Parent has obviously not read the Baroque Cycle or would have realized it is in part about the point at which in Western civilization money went from essentially tangible to essentially intangible. Apart from suggesting a study of economics, I'm not sure what parent expects of money beyond an intangible glue, perhaps credit-chip implants. What would be so original about that?
By "exited" I assume you mean you've more than pissed yourself?
CEO's are always in denial mode. To be otherwise is perceived weakness and unwillingness to protect shareholder value. Denial assures shareholders that you are practicing due diligence. Blaming anyone and anything else externalizes costs. That's why it's always Apples' fault, or mostly the users. Hence the mantra of 'no software liability'. It's why OS's controlled by corporations will always be never-ending voids of other people's innovation and crap.
Linux. Because it's our fault.