If Pd becomes mandated by law in the US it is going to severely cripple any software and hardware industry not associated with MS.
Um, yes, I believe that's the general idea. M$ would be very happy if everyone had to pay them to write any software that will run on a Windows machine.
Dell still pays Microsoft because they're required to--the way I understand it, whether or not they have Windows on a computer they sell, they have to pay for a copy of windows for that computer, and thus, so does the consumer. Otherwise, M$ won't let them sell any computers with Windows on them. It doesn't really work to bash Dell for this--they're nearly as much a victim as we are.
I'll grant that Dell is still a big company, and probably wouldn't hesitate to leave many consumers out in the cold if it meant a hefty profit, but do you really think they'd just GIVE money to anyone, least of all M$, who have some pretty draconian licenses for them? I doubt it.
Who the heck is Microsoft to say whether Dell ships their hardware with or without an OS on it?
As I understand it, it's not that they may not ship systems without an OS--it's just that if they do, they're no longer allowed to ship systems with Windows on them anymore. How much do you think that might hurt their sales? Yeah, it would hurt. Go, Dell! Exploit that loophole!
"Understanding is a three-edged sword" Their side, our side, and the truth.
Dan Aris
Re:Paladium - The End of General Purpose Computing
on
Analyzing Palladium
·
· Score: 1
Similar restrictions would apply to Copy, Paste, Save As, Send, and Export functions in Excel, Access, etc.
But for the patient, there is always an alternative method of Copying and Re-entering that can never be taken away until they outlaw pens and pencils. Any data that can be represented reasonably in a human-readable text form can never be truly secured as long as we retain the skills of reading and writing. In theory (though you'd have to be absolutely nuts to try it) you could write down the entire hex code to a movie file and type it in on an unsecured computer, thus bypassing the protection.
Dan Aris
Re:Maybe Macs wouldn't necessarily be safe...
on
Analyzing Palladium
·
· Score: 1
Actually, it would be impossible for a file locked by Palladium to be unreadable on a non-Palladium machine; there's nothing to stop you from just looking at the raw data, and sooner or later, given that scenario, someone would come up with a program that would de-Pallad locked files on non-Palladium machines. (maybe one for Macs, one for Linux, and one for illegal non-Palladium Windows machines)
However, I am quite disturbed by the thought that this might come to Macs. If it does, there's no way in heck I'm signing on; I say join the revolution now, avoid the Christmas rush.
I'd rather be cut off from the world (that is, the part of the world that buys into this) than a) stop using Macs, which I have loved for years for reasons too numerous to go into, or b) ever use a piece of software (or hardware) from Micro$oft. I seriously doubt that they will be able to stop mp3s I rip from CDs or download from P2P networks from working (particularly since all of mine are Japanese!), and if this ever happens, there will suddenly be a huge, booming pirate DVD industry for those who don't want to deal with the DRM.
Don't give in to them just because it's easier that way. Find a way to fight back. If you try for a month or so, I bet you'll find you can manage without anything M$, too.
Why should you need to promise not to do something bad?
Because if something like this was official, you couldn't be forced to do things that went contrary to it (like putting spyware in programs, or working for M$).
Couldn't this be considered extortion or blackmail? You will do A and B or we will do C.
Unfortunately, it's closer to saying, "You will pay your taxes or we will put you in jail." As stupid and evil as it is, I would guess (though IANAL) that they actually have a right to do this; it may even be in the EULAs (which I don't read either, but I don't use M$ software) that they're allowed to.
Personally, I would have no problems trusting my information to the government (well...maybe not the present government...see below). Microsoft, however, is a corporation, created for the express purpose of making money for Bill Gates. The government, on the other hand, is an organization created for the express purpose of serving the American people, however much the members of it may have forgotten that and tried to make it into a means of making money for themselves. I believe that before long, it will remember it, and be mostly trustworthy. I would never trust Microsoft to do anything except what will make the most money for Bill Gates--and if that means fiddling with our personal information, so that I'm suddenly a Russian woman with a criminal background (OK, extreme case, but that kind of thing), I expect they would do that. However many corrupt people there are in the government, its purpose still remains the same--to make our lives safer and more peaceful.
Yes, but you're assuming our government can think--and when it comes to technology, they haven't shown a very good track record (*cough*SSSCA*cough*). The thing about Microsoft is they have very good salesmen. If Bill Gates really wants this, he will send his best salesmen (and women, of course) to the government and tell them what a good idea it is. Why, he'll even give those low-income families free (Windows) computers with free (MSN) internet access, just to show what a nice guy he is! I don't mean to be alarmist or anything, but it doesn't seem too unrealistic (to me, anyway) that Gates would try such a thing.
It would be nice, though, if they could manage something to top their very first Mac commercial--several times voted the best ad ever (you know, the "1984 won't be like 1984" ad...it's such a great ad!).
Anyone who doubts the value of these uterine replicators need only read Lois McMaster Bujold's Miles Vorkosigan series: he suffered terrible prenatal damage--but because of the availability of uterine replicators, the doctors were able to treat him enough that he survived (and then proceeded to change the world, but that's HIS story...)
This isn't just a way to not have to go through the inconveniences of pregnancy--it's a way to avoid the dangers. Even today, women can have a very hard time having children; occasionally, some complication occurs and the mother, the baby, or both die. This would eliminate the risk to the mother, and, once the technology is mature, the risk to the baby. It can also make it much easier to monitor the baby, detect any genetic or birth defects early, and maybe correct them; and, yes, it does help the mother to be freer. How many mothers out there would have LOVED this in about the seventh or eighth month?
I'm sure the technology isn't ready for mainstream yet. However, I'm equally sure (techie optimist that I am) that once it is, it will help us a LOT.
Largely, I think, because they can. Also, because it can allow a vast number of games to be brought to the PS2 (thus increasing Sony's market penetration) simply by recompiling for the new platform. I'm sure things will take a little porting, but there's so much stuff--even commercial stuff--already there, that Sony really can't lose with this one.
Looks like the site is slashdotted already; anyone got a mirror they want/.ed real fast? I want this: I have a PS2, and would love to get my hands on a Linux distro that runs on it.
By the way, does anyone know if other distros (eg XDarwin) could be ported to PS2, now that this is here?
That's as may be...but it still doesn't compensate the people actually suing M$. Nor does it in any way at all reduce their monopoly or really penalize them. Even if they do pay every cent of the settlement and get none of it back, it's pocket change to M$. What needs to be done is something to combat their monopolistic practices. What, I'm not sure--I'm neither a lawyer nor an oracle. But I sure as heck know this ain't it.
Dan Aris
Sorry to burst your bubble, pal, but there's already a superior OS, and it's the one M$ ripped off in the first place--the Mac OS. Show me where Windows is not a ripoff of the Mac in some way. Now they're even taking the name (Mac OS X, Windows XP). And Windows is NOT the only non-unix-based OS out there; Mac OS 9.x is still going just fine.
Also, M$ is not a monopoly "because the market choose (sic) to let it be"--they are a monopoly because they give the market no choice. That, in fact, is basically the definition of monopoly. They have driven out almost every other high-end commercial word processor, spreadsheet program, and presentation software, and done their level best to destroy every other web browser, to the extent of making their site falsely block other browsers. The case against M$ is not outdated, they are still using monopolistic practices. The only reason it's hard to get anything to stick to them is that they have so much money.
Um...what do you mean, there isn't the evidence? Microsoft has already been found to be a monopoly. That determination has never been thrown out, overturned, or anything else, except perhaps forgotten, to M$'s great relief. The only reason Microsoft is still standing is the fact that most of the politicians in DC are afraid of what might happen to their kickbacks if Microsoft doesn't have quite the same obscene profit growth next quarter. Note, please, that it would take a lot more than the US government has to throw at Microsoft to even make their profits shrink by very much: Microsoft is not, and has never been, in danger of losing money. They just like to make us think they are so they can get sympathy.
Within the past few weeks, iTools moved to WebDAV standards (with a couple silly problems, I know, but it works, OK?) so now any platform can get there.
Erm..OK, yeah, that's true, but it's not Netscape MSN is blocking, it's Mozilla, the open-source, standards-compliant, bloat-free browser written from the same code base. Get your facts straight, people...
Of course, what MSN says and what is really true do NOT match up--it says that "the browser you are using will not render MSN.com correctly." But when I use OmniWeb (which can tell websites that ask that it's something different) saying it's IE, it works fine. Sooo...M$ is (as usual) lying, and you don't need IE, they just want to make you get it.
I'm imagining something a little scarier. Going to a website, say A(MS)azon. The site says, "Based on the hobby list I just accessed, here are some recommendations." "Happy birthday, Dan! I just read your calendar through Passport/.NET and found out it's your birthday!" "Here are some business books based on your job profile..." etc. Why should they bother to ask, once MS controls the whole (.)net?
Of course, that would never work for me, since I will never have a Passport/.NET/M$ account/identity. But would that then mean that I would no longer be able to use the (.)net for anything besides reading news on Slashdot?
I'm not sure just how well it's going to work, but I've put up a copy of the zipfile on my own FTP server. My server seems to works some of the time...hope this helps people who can't get through.
Oi! What about Macs? We have 5% of market share, very user-friendly, and with Mac OS X, there's even a significant amount of cross-platform compatibility--file-sharing through Samba, running files under Virtual PC, which works wonderfully, sometimes even faster than on a real PC. I, personally, am waiting with bated breath for the day StarOffice/OpenOffice becomes properly functional under MacOS, so I can get rid of my copy of Office 98 (probably under an illegal license, since I haven't upgraded to XP). Then I will be totally Microsoft-free--and I intend to remain so. Never forget that there is already something user-friendly to fall back on. I really, really like Linux, but I am so fed up with Linux users dismissing MacOS as a toy or not even counting it at all, as you seem to be doing. Mac OS X is beautiful (XP's design was ripped off of it) and functional?and it sits on top of BSD, so I can do anything you can do. Thank you very much.
Slashdot Mirror
Dan Aris
Dell still pays Microsoft because they're required to--the way I understand it, whether or not they have Windows on a computer they sell, they have to pay for a copy of windows for that computer, and thus, so does the consumer. Otherwise, M$ won't let them sell any computers with Windows on them. It doesn't really work to bash Dell for this--they're nearly as much a victim as we are.
I'll grant that Dell is still a big company, and probably wouldn't hesitate to leave many consumers out in the cold if it meant a hefty profit, but do you really think they'd just GIVE money to anyone, least of all M$, who have some pretty draconian licenses for them? I doubt it.
Dan Aris
Dan Aris
"Understanding is a three-edged sword"
Their side, our side, and the truth.
Dan Aris
Similar restrictions would apply to Copy, Paste, Save As, Send, and Export functions in Excel, Access, etc.
But for the patient, there is always an alternative method of Copying and Re-entering that can never be taken away until they outlaw pens and pencils. Any data that can be represented reasonably in a human-readable text form can never be truly secured as long as we retain the skills of reading and writing. In theory (though you'd have to be absolutely nuts to try it) you could write down the entire hex code to a movie file and type it in on an unsecured computer, thus bypassing the protection.
Dan Aris
Actually, it would be impossible for a file locked by Palladium to be unreadable on a non-Palladium machine; there's nothing to stop you from just looking at the raw data, and sooner or later, given that scenario, someone would come up with a program that would de-Pallad locked files on non-Palladium machines. (maybe one for Macs, one for Linux, and one for illegal non-Palladium Windows machines)
However, I am quite disturbed by the thought that this might come to Macs. If it does, there's no way in heck I'm signing on; I say join the revolution now, avoid the Christmas rush.
Dan Aris
I'd rather be cut off from the world (that is, the part of the world that buys into this) than a) stop using Macs, which I have loved for years for reasons too numerous to go into, or b) ever use a piece of software (or hardware) from Micro$oft. I seriously doubt that they will be able to stop mp3s I rip from CDs or download from P2P networks from working (particularly since all of mine are Japanese!), and if this ever happens, there will suddenly be a huge, booming pirate DVD industry for those who don't want to deal with the DRM.
Don't give in to them just because it's easier that way. Find a way to fight back. If you try for a month or so, I bet you'll find you can manage without anything M$, too.
Dan Aris
Why should you need to promise not to do something bad?
Because if something like this was official, you couldn't be forced to do things that went contrary to it (like putting spyware in programs, or working for M$).
Dan Aris
Couldn't this be considered extortion or blackmail? You will do A and B or we will do C.
Unfortunately, it's closer to saying, "You will pay your taxes or we will put you in jail." As stupid and evil as it is, I would guess (though IANAL) that they actually have a right to do this; it may even be in the EULAs (which I don't read either, but I don't use M$ software) that they're allowed to.
Dan Aris
You have the seeds of a great comic novel there.
Don't you mean horror? I'm pretty scared.
Dan Aris
Personally, I would have no problems trusting my information to the government (well...maybe not the present government...see below). Microsoft, however, is a corporation, created for the express purpose of making money for Bill Gates. The government, on the other hand, is an organization created for the express purpose of serving the American people, however much the members of it may have forgotten that and tried to make it into a means of making money for themselves. I believe that before long, it will remember it, and be mostly trustworthy. I would never trust Microsoft to do anything except what will make the most money for Bill Gates--and if that means fiddling with our personal information, so that I'm suddenly a Russian woman with a criminal background (OK, extreme case, but that kind of thing), I expect they would do that. However many corrupt people there are in the government, its purpose still remains the same--to make our lives safer and more peaceful.
Dan Aris
Yes, but you're assuming our government can think--and when it comes to technology, they haven't shown a very good track record (*cough*SSSCA*cough*). The thing about Microsoft is they have very good salesmen. If Bill Gates really wants this, he will send his best salesmen (and women, of course) to the government and tell them what a good idea it is. Why, he'll even give those low-income families free (Windows) computers with free (MSN) internet access, just to show what a nice guy he is! I don't mean to be alarmist or anything, but it doesn't seem too unrealistic (to me, anyway) that Gates would try such a thing.
Dan Aris
It would be nice, though, if they could manage something to top their very first Mac commercial--several times voted the best ad ever (you know, the "1984 won't be like 1984" ad...it's such a great ad!).
Dan Aris
Anyone who doubts the value of these uterine replicators need only read Lois McMaster Bujold's Miles Vorkosigan series: he suffered terrible prenatal damage--but because of the availability of uterine replicators, the doctors were able to treat him enough that he survived (and then proceeded to change the world, but that's HIS story...)
This isn't just a way to not have to go through the inconveniences of pregnancy--it's a way to avoid the dangers. Even today, women can have a very hard time having children; occasionally, some complication occurs and the mother, the baby, or both die. This would eliminate the risk to the mother, and, once the technology is mature, the risk to the baby. It can also make it much easier to monitor the baby, detect any genetic or birth defects early, and maybe correct them; and, yes, it does help the mother to be freer. How many mothers out there would have LOVED this in about the seventh or eighth month?
I'm sure the technology isn't ready for mainstream yet. However, I'm equally sure (techie optimist that I am) that once it is, it will help us a LOT.
Dan Aris
Largely, I think, because they can. Also, because it can allow a vast number of games to be brought to the PS2 (thus increasing Sony's market penetration) simply by recompiling for the new platform. I'm sure things will take a little porting, but there's so much stuff--even commercial stuff--already there, that Sony really can't lose with this one.
And besides that, it's so cool!
Dan Aris
Looks like the site is slashdotted already; anyone got a mirror they want /.ed real fast? I want this: I have a PS2, and would love to get my hands on a Linux distro that runs on it.
By the way, does anyone know if other distros (eg XDarwin) could be ported to PS2, now that this is here?
Dan Aris
That's as may be...but it still doesn't compensate the people actually suing M$. Nor does it in any way at all reduce their monopoly or really penalize them. Even if they do pay every cent of the settlement and get none of it back, it's pocket change to M$. What needs to be done is something to combat their monopolistic practices. What, I'm not sure--I'm neither a lawyer nor an oracle. But I sure as heck know this ain't it. Dan Aris
Sorry to burst your bubble, pal, but there's already a superior OS, and it's the one M$ ripped off in the first place--the Mac OS. Show me where Windows is not a ripoff of the Mac in some way. Now they're even taking the name (Mac OS X, Windows XP). And Windows is NOT the only non-unix-based OS out there; Mac OS 9.x is still going just fine.
Also, M$ is not a monopoly "because the market choose (sic) to let it be"--they are a monopoly because they give the market no choice. That, in fact, is basically the definition of monopoly. They have driven out almost every other high-end commercial word processor, spreadsheet program, and presentation software, and done their level best to destroy every other web browser, to the extent of making their site falsely block other browsers. The case against M$ is not outdated, they are still using monopolistic practices. The only reason it's hard to get anything to stick to them is that they have so much money.
Dan Aris
Um...what do you mean, there isn't the evidence? Microsoft has already been found to be a monopoly. That determination has never been thrown out, overturned, or anything else, except perhaps forgotten, to M$'s great relief. The only reason Microsoft is still standing is the fact that most of the politicians in DC are afraid of what might happen to their kickbacks if Microsoft doesn't have quite the same obscene profit growth next quarter. Note, please, that it would take a lot more than the US government has to throw at Microsoft to even make their profits shrink by very much: Microsoft is not, and has never been, in danger of losing money. They just like to make us think they are so they can get sympathy.
Poor, poor Microsoft.
Dan Aris, more than a little bitter
Within the past few weeks, iTools moved to WebDAV standards (with a couple silly problems, I know, but it works, OK?) so now any platform can get there.
Dan Aris
Erm..OK, yeah, that's true, but it's not Netscape MSN is blocking, it's Mozilla, the open-source, standards-compliant, bloat-free browser written from the same code base. Get your facts straight, people...
Dan Aris
Of course, what MSN says and what is really true do NOT match up--it says that "the browser you are using will not render MSN.com correctly." But when I use OmniWeb (which can tell websites that ask that it's something different) saying it's IE, it works fine. Sooo...M$ is (as usual) lying, and you don't need IE, they just want to make you get it.
Dan Aris
I'm imagining something a little scarier. Going to a website, say A(MS)azon. The site says, "Based on the hobby list I just accessed, here are some recommendations." "Happy birthday, Dan! I just read your calendar through Passport/.NET and found out it's your birthday!" "Here are some business books based on your job profile..." etc. Why should they bother to ask, once MS controls the whole (.)net?
Of course, that would never work for me, since I will never have a Passport/.NET/M$ account/identity. But would that then mean that I would no longer be able to use the (.)net for anything besides reading news on Slashdot?
Dan Aris
I'm not sure just how well it's going to work, but I've put up a copy of the zipfile on my own FTP server. My server seems to works some of the time...hope this helps people who can't get through.
Dan Aris
Oi! What about Macs? We have 5% of market share, very user-friendly, and with Mac OS X, there's even a significant amount of cross-platform compatibility--file-sharing through Samba, running files under Virtual PC, which works wonderfully, sometimes even faster than on a real PC. I, personally, am waiting with bated breath for the day StarOffice/OpenOffice becomes properly functional under MacOS, so I can get rid of my copy of Office 98 (probably under an illegal license, since I haven't upgraded to XP). Then I will be totally Microsoft-free--and I intend to remain so. Never forget that there is already something user-friendly to fall back on. I really, really like Linux, but I am so fed up with Linux users dismissing MacOS as a toy or not even counting it at all, as you seem to be doing. Mac OS X is beautiful (XP's design was ripped off of it) and functional?and it sits on top of BSD, so I can do anything you can do. Thank you very much.
Dan Aris