But maybe it would damage national security. To say it's perjury, you have to prove he was not telling the truth. How does this prove he wan't telling the truth?
The Gates Foundation has awarded over $5 BILLION in grants and has an endowment of $24 BILLION. Is that a lot of money to me and you? Hell yeah! Is that a lot of money to him? Damn right. It's not all his money personally, but still, a huge portion of it is.
To call him not generous or a humanitarian is either ignorant or mean spirited.
Re:If this is not "anti-competitive", then what is
on
Microsoft Buys Rare
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I always find it funny when someone thinks they are so insightful and important, then they get to have their own ignorance thrown back in their face. Naughty Dog, Incog, Red Zone, Psygnosis, etc. How many game developers would you like me to list that Sony has purchased?
Let me guess - it's not "dirty tactics" when they do it, right?
DRM already exists on cable, that is exactly what subscribing to HBO is about,
WRONG!!!!!
I think the point is, you can't (at least legally) copy HBO and blah blah blah unless you subscribe to it. The cable box controls what you have access to. I think the original poster was confusing DRM and conditional access.
You have a right to make a backup copy of your software, IF you are capable of doing so. The manufacturer does NOT have to provide the software in a medium which you can copy.
Think about when software first became available on CD. CD copying technology was not widely available to the consumer, and was very expensive. Were your rights being violated? Of course not. Same thing with software on DVD.
People should take this into account when purchasing their software. Can I make backups of the software, to prolong its life? Yes? That's a feature and a positive for buying it. No? Perhaps you should look elsewhere.
Re:Oh that's very responsible of you, SlashDot
on
Microsoft News Update
·
· Score: 1
So it would be ok for Slashdot to post a list of homes that leave their doors unlocked when the people are not home, or direct instructions for easily picking the lock and stealing your car, or how about your credit card number and your SS number? It's not their responsibility what people do with it.
That said, I think Slashdot has every right to post the link in question. I just think they are assholes for doing it.
I see what you are saying now. I guess I thought you were saying there were specific innovations that MS somehow crushed.
However, IE is/was the dominant browser, so wouldn't it make sense that some other browser would have more motivation to come up with something innovative to set itself apart? Opera, for instance, has some interesting features (mouse gestures, etc) that were added to set itself apart. I don't see how Microsoft's market position hurt that at all, or the development of Mozilla/Netscape. Perhaps mentally it was diificult for them to think about overcoming the market lead MS has.
I don't get it. This wasn't meant to be a troll. I'm assuming there are some specific examples of browser innovations that Microsoft somehow "hobbled". I was hoping for an actual response from someone.
First off, that is NOT what the lawsuit was about in the first place. The MS virtual machine did not pass Sun's compatibility tests, not because what MS added, but because of what they left out. Sun said MS could not include it in Windows or use the Java logo, because it did not pass the tests. The extensions that MS added were completely legal under the agreement with Sun (see section 2.1.a of their license agreement).
Anyway, how is this "Monopoly Abuse" then? I know Sun (and a lot of others) like to throw this phrase around, because it gets attention. I cannot see how Microsoft's market position, or the original lawsuit, has anything to do with this at all. I understand that MS not including Java may hurt the acceptance of Java, but what compels MS to include Java at all? Why isn't Sun made to include.NET support in Solaris?
The original poster claimed that W2K could not possibly run calculations for hours or days. My response was directly to that statement. Pay attention or shut the hell up.
If you don't believe me, I really don't care at all. Your ignorance and bias is your own cross to bear.
The original poster claimed that W2K could not possibly run calculations for hours or days. My response was directly to that statement. Pay attention or shut the hell up.
What?!??!? This is a troll right? Have you ever spent any time with computationally intensive work? I'm talking calculations that take hours, days, weeks. Even W2k, while improved cannot work with 4GB or more of RAM, crunch on an algorhithm for two or three days, and not have problems. Hell the W98 box I replaced with our W2k 2.2Ghz box would crash multiple times a day.
Well then you don't know what the hell you are doing. There is no reason in the world a W2K box should crash, especially several times a day, unless you have no idea how to set it up properly or you have a hardware problem. Don't try and blame MS for your own incompetence.
I have personally seen a group of 6 Win2k machines run computations at near 100% processor time for 3 days. No problem.
Sorry, little guy. He rightfully ripped you up for your idiotic post.
"People with personality don't use MS" is probably one of the stupidest things ever posted on Slashdot, and that is saying something. I'm sure your goal is to have the other Linux zealots like you, and maybe even get a few karma points, but being an arrogant jackass is not the way.
There are WAY more ant-MS zealots than there were 5 years ago. WAY more.
The general public is not capable of producing "rational, well-formed" arguments about Microsoft because the general public does not have even a simple understanding of corporate law, business practices, or the way companies operate, legal or otherwise. All they know is MS is popular, and they hear people say meaningless things like "Microsoft has damaged innovation", so they hop on the bandwagon to seem smart and cool.
For instance, search around for the phrase "leverage their monopoly". 99% of the time, what the person describes is not leveraging their monopoly at all. People are just horribly ignorant on the subject, so they just toss around catch-phrases to try and make their unfounded point.
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.boycott-hollywood.us/boycott_list.htm - You're Freedom of Speech
Do you mean "YOUR Freedom of Speech"? I'm not sure what "YOU ARE Freedom of Speech" means.
Now that right there sounds like one fucking lazy way of getting people to code shit for you. Plus another way to use OTHER PEOPLE'S ideas.
Isn't that the entire basis for Open Source software?
It's more like companies like Coke paying TV and movie execs for product placement in their shows/films.
But maybe it would damage national security. To say it's perjury, you have to prove he was not telling the truth. How does this prove he wan't telling the truth?
He said it could damage national security. How is that perjury?
The Gates Foundation has awarded over $5 BILLION in grants and has an endowment of $24 BILLION. Is that a lot of money to me and you? Hell yeah! Is that a lot of money to him? Damn right. It's not all his money personally, but still, a huge portion of it is.
To call him not generous or a humanitarian is either ignorant or mean spirited.
I always find it funny when someone thinks they are so insightful and important, then they get to have their own ignorance thrown back in their face. Naughty Dog, Incog, Red Zone, Psygnosis, etc. How many game developers would you like me to list that Sony has purchased?
Let me guess - it's not "dirty tactics" when they do it, right?
but when a company in Microsoft's position does it then the action can fairly be described as an illegal extension of their monopoly powers
How is this an "illegal extension of their monopoly powers"? I'm intrigued.
DRM already exists on cable, that is exactly what subscribing to HBO is about,
WRONG!!!!!
I think the point is, you can't (at least legally) copy HBO and blah blah blah unless you subscribe to it. The cable box controls what you have access to. I think the original poster was confusing DRM and conditional access.
Please Stick to Java. Don't sell you soul
to mickysoft.
Exactly. Sell it to Sun instead, because that is better.
Why is there a copyright at the end of the article in your sig?
You have a right to make a backup copy of your software, IF you are capable of doing so. The manufacturer does NOT have to provide the software in a medium which you can copy.
Think about when software first became available on CD. CD copying technology was not widely available to the consumer, and was very expensive. Were your rights being violated? Of course not. Same thing with software on DVD.
People should take this into account when purchasing their software. Can I make backups of the software, to prolong its life? Yes? That's a feature and a positive for buying it. No? Perhaps you should look elsewhere.
So it would be ok for Slashdot to post a list of homes that leave their doors unlocked when the people are not home, or direct instructions for easily picking the lock and stealing your car, or how about your credit card number and your SS number? It's not their responsibility what people do with it.
That said, I think Slashdot has every right to post the link in question. I just think they are assholes for doing it.
I see what you are saying now. I guess I thought you were saying there were specific innovations that MS somehow crushed.
However, IE is/was the dominant browser, so wouldn't it make sense that some other browser would have more motivation to come up with something innovative to set itself apart? Opera, for instance, has some interesting features (mouse gestures, etc) that were added to set itself apart. I don't see how Microsoft's market position hurt that at all, or the development of Mozilla/Netscape. Perhaps mentally it was diificult for them to think about overcoming the market lead MS has.
I don't get it. This wasn't meant to be a troll. I'm assuming there are some specific examples of browser innovations that Microsoft somehow "hobbled". I was hoping for an actual response from someone.
Microsoft's desktop monopoloy and browser integration have hobbled browser innovation
Which innovations? And how have they hobbled them?
First off, that is NOT what the lawsuit was about in the first place. The MS virtual machine did not pass Sun's compatibility tests, not because what MS added, but because of what they left out. Sun said MS could not include it in Windows or use the Java logo, because it did not pass the tests. The extensions that MS added were completely legal under the agreement with Sun (see section 2.1.a of their license agreement).
.NET support in Solaris?
Anyway, how is this "Monopoly Abuse" then? I know Sun (and a lot of others) like to throw this phrase around, because it gets attention. I cannot see how Microsoft's market position, or the original lawsuit, has anything to do with this at all. I understand that MS not including Java may hurt the acceptance of Java, but what compels MS to include Java at all? Why isn't Sun made to include
The original poster claimed that W2K could not possibly run calculations for hours or days. My response was directly to that statement. Pay attention or shut the hell up.
If you don't believe me, I really don't care at all. Your ignorance and bias is your own cross to bear.
The original poster claimed that W2K could not possibly run calculations for hours or days. My response was directly to that statement. Pay attention or shut the hell up.
What?!??!? This is a troll right? Have you ever spent any time with computationally intensive work? I'm talking calculations that take hours, days, weeks. Even W2k, while improved cannot work with 4GB or more of RAM, crunch on an algorhithm for two or three days, and not have problems. Hell the W98 box I replaced with our W2k 2.2Ghz box would crash multiple times a day.
Well then you don't know what the hell you are doing. There is no reason in the world a W2K box should crash, especially several times a day, unless you have no idea how to set it up properly or you have a hardware problem. Don't try and blame MS for your own incompetence.
I have personally seen a group of 6 Win2k machines run computations at near 100% processor time for 3 days. No problem.
Sorry, little guy. He rightfully ripped you up for your idiotic post.
"People with personality don't use MS" is probably one of the stupidest things ever posted on Slashdot, and that is saying something. I'm sure your goal is to have the other Linux zealots like you, and maybe even get a few karma points, but being an arrogant jackass is not the way.
Well, Mr. BigSupporterOfChoice, thanks for telling me what formats I should and shouldn't support or use.
Should I mindlessly click on the Real formats instead? Even though their quality sucks? What message is that sending?
My point was that what he said was completely wrong. That was obvious from my post.
Either you were trying to be clever and failed, or you have very poor reading comprehension skills.
There are WAY more ant-MS zealots than there were 5 years ago. WAY more.
The general public is not capable of producing "rational, well-formed" arguments about Microsoft because the general public does not have even a simple understanding of corporate law, business practices, or the way companies operate, legal or otherwise. All they know is MS is popular, and they hear people say meaningless things like "Microsoft has damaged innovation", so they hop on the bandwagon to seem smart and cool.
For instance, search around for the phrase "leverage their monopoly". 99% of the time, what the person describes is not leveraging their monopoly at all. People are just horribly ignorant on the subject, so they just toss around catch-phrases to try and make their unfounded point.
The more I think about it the more I begin to believe that Windows is not an OS per se but an Application Framework integrated into an OS.
I agree. I think they should have started calling it the "Windows Platform" a long time ago.