One more point before I am done with this thread...
"why are we all paying subscriptions for communicating?"
Communicating is not what you are paying for. It's still free to communicate with anyone in the world. Just go get your plane ticket (mail your money, please) and fly on over to strike up your conversation.
This article is so assinine, I am already tired of writing.
What will the religous establishments say IF they do find undeniable evidence of life (past or present) on Mars?
I can not wait to hear the spin put on that one.
Note: I am serious when I say it is the most interesting question. I really do want to hear how the world's religons grapple with this issue if/when it does arise.
But again, what is the incentive for **AA to deal with each individual university (and, presumably preferential pricing "for students") instead of come commercial service a la Pressplay or whatever the flavor of this month is?
Either way, they get the money so why bother with the hassel of dealing with 1000+ universities and the administration required to do so?
Um, yea...you could say that. Can someone please give me one good reason why the **AA's would participate in a program like this vs. some kind of commercial offering? I mean, not to sound negative but its pretty clear by now that charity (ie: "student" programs) are not very high on their list of priorities. Hell, they just got done SUING some of their customers.
And besides, wasn't this tried before? *cough* mp3.com *cough*
"Sure just like there are millions of car mechanics who are gainfully employed fixing fords. If Ford wen out of business those same mechanics would fix chevys. Those people you talk about are not married to MS, they only work on MS stuff because it's the most popular. Once the MS popularity starts decreasing they will switch."
Perhaps you are correct about the above but one thing is certain: the switch would not happen anytime soon. If you reference the post I originally replied to, you'll see that I was questioning the posters assessment that "Microsoft's survival is at stake".
I still assert that Microsoft is the 800lb gorilla (duh!) -- but I differ in opinion on the future of MS because I believe they are here to stay -- at least for the forseeable future (minimum 15-20 years, prolly more). Short of an Enron-type collapse, they are just too powerful to take on and defeat, despite what the Linux zealots tell you.
Everytime I read some anti-MS posting where someone predicts "Microsoft is going down", all I think of is......46 billion. In cash. Even the worst of the worst companies (ie: Bethlehem Steel) would take many many years to burn through that much money taking them to the point of bankruptcy.
Gross generalization: Lots of folks on this board have no concept of big-business and the finances/power behind it. If it's so easy to beat the big guys, then go start another AT&T. Or MS. Or IBM. Or Ford. Or DuPont. Or Exxon. Just try. Not to be negative, but I'd bet against you - and the odds are, I'd be right.
"I don't count everybody who buys gasoline as an employee of exxon, I don't count everybody who shops at walmart as an employee of walmart, why would I count people who worked with MS software as MS employees?"
Ahhh, agreed. Perhaps I chose the wrong words but my point remains the same...and that point is this: a) MS has a lot of "clout" and is not going away anytime soon and b) there are MANY MANY people with financially vested interests who "depend" on MS to make a living. No *nix can claim that to the extent that MS can. Not even close. If it were the case that *nix enjoyed the same level of "support" as MS, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
There just aren't that many ppl who share the open-source ideology enough to sway their software purchasing. (note: I'm not saying that is right or wrong, just saying it is what it is)
Would you doubt that Microsoft employs that many ppl if you count indirect employment as well (ie: consulting, help desk, network admin, development, outsourcing, etc) ? Most of the ppl I know in IT have, at some point worked on Microsoft stuff. If I were a betting man, I'd say Microsoft is responsible for millions and millions of jobs around the country.
(note: this is not flamebait) Besides, the point I was making is that Microsoft is here for sometime. Those that think that Linux is going to topple Microsoft anytime in the forseeable future don't have an understanding of how multi-national businesses work. Its not as easy as just putting a product out to market and saying "Hey look! Our product is technically better!". There is MUCH more to it than that, as you well know....
The figures are from Yahoo finance. You can look them up and verify if you wish, but they are correct.
Your first sentence gives away your question: "...everyone moves to Open Source and Microsoft can't adapt..."
Do you really think that will happen, given Microsoft's position in the World? I mean, hoestly, like I said, I am all for open-source and Linux in particular, but there is, currently, no way that Linux or open-source can provide all of the "services" I mentioned in my first post (Marketing, PR, Lobbying, standards setting, blah, blah, blah) better than Microsoft can. It just isn't happening and isn't going to happen in the forseeable future. Sooo, it appears that Microsoft is going to be around a while - barring some miracle where all of their products (X-box, Office, OS'es, MSN, MSNBC, and the rest) mysteriously vaporize and income goes to zero overnight. I don't mean to be flippant but I hope we agree that Microsoft is not just going to sit idly by and watch. The have R&D. They have Marketing. They are, and will continue to *try* to be #1, right? I hope we can agree on that. And if you agree that they will continue to try to secure their own future (via profits) it doesn't matter if one or two products aren't profitable. All that matters is that Microsoft - as a whole - makes money....or has enough money to tide itself over during bad times. And that brings us to your second point.
I'm not sure where you come from but where I come from, $46 billion is a lot of money. In fact, if you do a little research, you will see it is the single largest Cash-on-hand position of any company in the world. Microsoft is rich - even in "big company" terms. They're reserves are absolutely HUGE and they have a LOT of wiggle room to make mistakes, cover the bad times, and invest in R&D. Not sure how that becomes a laughable figure sooooo...
It's a whore's market. In most cases, lowest bid wins. There are exceptions (DOD, I am sure) but for the most part, governments are primarily looking at price.
They demand cheap. That's it. That's the formula to getting the government's business (any government). Got the cheapest product that will get the job done? Great, now if you're the lower bid, you'll get the business.
Microsoft isn't stupid. They can play in a whore's market too. With the margins they have on their products, hell, they can practically give it away and still make money.
I am as big a linux fan as anyone but do you honestly think that Microsoft's survival is at stake here? Highly doubtful, IMHO.
Think about it. You have one of the top five largest corporations in the WORLD (market cap). Let me repeat that: in the world. That company is worth $275 billion as of today. Cash reserves on-hand are $46 billion. In cash. As in, "Wow, Steve! Our statement is huge this month!". Think of how many hundred dollar bills that is. Microsoft employs over 50,000 people directly and, no doubt, hundreds of thousands more indirectly through consulting, help desk, services, and other software/services.
In other words, they are big, important, and so-far, very very smart. Oh yea, and don't forget rich.
Now I know Linux is a good OS (I use it!) and I am sure there are many areas where it is the *best* choice for an OS....but the idea of Linux alone "bringing down" Microsoft is suspect at best. There is much more that must go into a product (OS, Office, or otherwise) other than good programming, better technology, or the "right" philosophy behind building your product. It takes much more than that -- and Microsoft has all of those things. Linux does not. I'm not passing judgement as I am an avid user of Linux though I am stating fact. If you think that Redhat, IBM, SCO, or whoever is the flavor of the month can provide all of the "services" Microsoft can (and don't forget Marketing, PR, Lobbying, R&D, Investment capital, standards setting, and other functions that any large multi-national company must have to flourish) then I say to you ------------
Why has Microsoft been so successful over the past 20 years? Could it be because they are good at the things I mentioned above?
The point is: Microsoft is here, in one form or another, for a very very long time (unless the govt breaks them up). Their "survival" is far from at-risk, to say the least.
This is a great service and a step in the right direction. However, there is a major flaw in the strategy. You see, this service works FANTASTIC -- but only if you use Apple.
And therein lies the problem. Apple has neither the production capability nor partnerships to make this happen. Yea, so I can burn it to CD (on my mac) and port it to my iPod (apple, too). Ok. But what about my portable mp3 player? Nope. What about my DVD/Mp3 player? Nope. What about my audiotron or home network? Nope. What about my PC? Nope. Can't do it.
customer "So I have to buy an apple product to use this?" -- yep. Sure do.
customer: "Screw that! Why do I have to buy something from Apple to do this? Oh - that's right. They're a hardware company too (that, incidentally, has a history of not being able to meet demand for its products)
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why this will ultimately fail in the long run. It's a DOA.
Yes, I agree....Skynet it is. But the tighter they squeeze, the more people get through. They most certainly don't have the resources to continually monitor every person and every technology out there. It's just too much -- even for them.
Meanwhile, I'll be cruising on by, hardly noticed, in my shiny old blue Ford Taurus.:-)
After you read this, don't forget the fact that statistics can be used to prove anything
This whole site is dedicated to telling me that there are less lawsuits now than in the 70's and 80's. That is, undoubtedly true -- but not for the reasons you think. Could it be, perhaps, that most of the cases are settled out of court because of the extravagent cost of defending it?
Hmmm....
If you get sued for $50,000 and it would cost you $100,000 to defend yourself, wouldn't you settle out of court? I would.
Actually (assuming your question is legit and not flamebait), I appreciate the rhythymic tone of the lyrics. It makes my feet move and it has a very nice beat...
When I say I'm an audiophile, that means I love usic. All different kinds of music. I'm not a snob about the music I listen to. I don't like independent music just because its independent and I don't hate "big" music just because its big. I listen to what I like. Sometimes, that's Top-40 "garbage" as some call it, sometimes it's unheard-of local bands. I will say, however, that I tend to discard the Top-40 fairly quickly and it "gets old" to me after hearing it too many times.
I'm still waiting for an "objective" ratings house to help me with the selection of my music. While I am a TOTAL audiophile, I do not have the time to wade through mounds and mounds of crappy independent artists in order to find the 2-3 good songs I actually end up liking.
Take hip hop, for example. Now, I don't like ALL hip-hop, but I do like the "dance" hip hop songs that make my feet move. Gangsta rap? No. RnB? No. Soul? Nope. Don't like any of those....just a few of the "dance" tracks (think: In Da Club - by 50 cent). Right now, there is no easy way for me to identify, much less download this kind of music. I have to wade through piles and piles of crap (both independent and large record) to get what I want. Now, if there were a reputable "reviewage" site (ala the Billboard top 50 but more objective), I would have a use for it -- in a big way.
Hell, I might actually PAY for it!
Personally, I think this is the only way a middle man can survive in the music industry -- by providing a "service" to help people wade through the crap.
Ok, so given we can't violate the laws of thermodynamics, what if the phone charged itself while in your pocket - due to you moving around?
While most have pooh-pooh'ed this story due to the stupid vibration comment, I'm thinking of something similar to a Rolex watch. You walk and "vibrate" the phone with your kinetic energy. That moves a mechanism (presumably what this story is about) and your phone charges. Kinda like Rolex watches...
Slashdot Mirror
One more point before I am done with this thread...
"why are we all paying subscriptions for communicating?"
Communicating is not what you are paying for. It's still free to communicate with anyone in the world. Just go get your plane ticket (mail your money, please) and fly on over to strike up your conversation.
This article is so assinine, I am already tired of writing.
Who the hell do you think maintains those "global extremely-high-speed ad-hoc wireless data & voice networks"?
They don't just happen by accident. There is TREMENDOUS expense and expertise necessary to keep them running and "servicing" the customers.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. - Carl Sagan
What will the religous establishments say IF they do find undeniable evidence of life (past or present) on Mars?
I can not wait to hear the spin put on that one.
Note: I am serious when I say it is the most interesting question. I really do want to hear how the world's religons grapple with this issue if/when it does arise.
But again, what is the incentive for **AA to deal with each individual university (and, presumably preferential pricing "for students") instead of come commercial service a la Pressplay or whatever the flavor of this month is?
Either way, they get the money so why bother with the hassel of dealing with 1000+ universities and the administration required to do so?
Um, yea...you could say that. Can someone please give me one good reason why the **AA's would participate in a program like this vs. some kind of commercial offering? I mean, not to sound negative but its pretty clear by now that charity (ie: "student" programs) are not very high on their list of priorities. Hell, they just got done SUING some of their customers.
And besides, wasn't this tried before? *cough* mp3.com *cough*
....and that is why you will never be any good in politics. Keep your day job (and I suspect you want to!) :-)
Along these lines, am I still the only one who will sit and watch ants build an antpile? No matter how many times I see it, I'm still in awe
...and yes, I am a geek.
My whole family is farmers and let me say, they are the original "survivalists". Anyone that tells you different has never stepped foot on a farm.
"Sure just like there are millions of car mechanics who are gainfully employed fixing fords. If Ford wen out of business those same mechanics would fix chevys. Those people you talk about are not married to MS, they only work on MS stuff because it's the most popular. Once the MS popularity starts decreasing they will switch."
Perhaps you are correct about the above but one thing is certain: the switch would not happen anytime soon. If you reference the post I originally replied to, you'll see that I was questioning the posters assessment that "Microsoft's survival is at stake".
I still assert that Microsoft is the 800lb gorilla (duh!) -- but I differ in opinion on the future of MS because I believe they are here to stay -- at least for the forseeable future (minimum 15-20 years, prolly more). Short of an Enron-type collapse, they are just too powerful to take on and defeat, despite what the Linux zealots tell you.
Everytime I read some anti-MS posting where someone predicts "Microsoft is going down", all I think of is......46 billion. In cash. Even the worst of the worst companies (ie: Bethlehem Steel) would take many many years to burn through that much money taking them to the point of bankruptcy.
Gross generalization: Lots of folks on this board have no concept of big-business and the finances/power behind it. If it's so easy to beat the big guys, then go start another AT&T. Or MS. Or IBM. Or Ford. Or DuPont. Or Exxon. Just try. Not to be negative, but I'd bet against you - and the odds are, I'd be right.
"I don't count everybody who buys gasoline as an employee of exxon, I don't count everybody who shops at walmart as an employee of walmart, why would I count people who worked with MS software as MS employees?"
Ahhh, agreed. Perhaps I chose the wrong words but my point remains the same...and that point is this: a) MS has a lot of "clout" and is not going away anytime soon and b) there are MANY MANY people with financially vested interests who "depend" on MS to make a living. No *nix can claim that to the extent that MS can. Not even close. If it were the case that *nix enjoyed the same level of "support" as MS, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
There just aren't that many ppl who share the open-source ideology enough to sway their software purchasing. (note: I'm not saying that is right or wrong, just saying it is what it is)
Would you doubt that Microsoft employs that many ppl if you count indirect employment as well (ie: consulting, help desk, network admin, development, outsourcing, etc) ? Most of the ppl I know in IT have, at some point worked on Microsoft stuff. If I were a betting man, I'd say Microsoft is responsible for millions and millions of jobs around the country.
(note: this is not flamebait) Besides, the point I was making is that Microsoft is here for sometime. Those that think that Linux is going to topple Microsoft anytime in the forseeable future don't have an understanding of how multi-national businesses work. Its not as easy as just putting a product out to market and saying "Hey look! Our product is technically better!". There is MUCH more to it than that, as you well know....
The figures are from Yahoo finance. You can look them up and verify if you wish, but they are correct.
Your first sentence gives away your question: "...everyone moves to Open Source and Microsoft can't adapt..."
Do you really think that will happen, given Microsoft's position in the World? I mean, hoestly, like I said, I am all for open-source and Linux in particular, but there is, currently, no way that Linux or open-source can provide all of the "services" I mentioned in my first post (Marketing, PR, Lobbying, standards setting, blah, blah, blah) better than Microsoft can. It just isn't happening and isn't going to happen in the forseeable future. Sooo, it appears that Microsoft is going to be around a while - barring some miracle where all of their products (X-box, Office, OS'es, MSN, MSNBC, and the rest) mysteriously vaporize and income goes to zero overnight. I don't mean to be flippant but I hope we agree that Microsoft is not just going to sit idly by and watch. The have R&D. They have Marketing. They are, and will continue to *try* to be #1, right? I hope we can agree on that. And if you agree that they will continue to try to secure their own future (via profits) it doesn't matter if one or two products aren't profitable. All that matters is that Microsoft - as a whole - makes money....or has enough money to tide itself over during bad times. And that brings us to your second point.
I'm not sure where you come from but where I come from, $46 billion is a lot of money. In fact, if you do a little research, you will see it is the single largest Cash-on-hand position of any company in the world. Microsoft is rich - even in "big company" terms. They're reserves are absolutely HUGE and they have a LOT of wiggle room to make mistakes, cover the bad times, and invest in R&D. Not sure how that becomes a laughable figure sooooo...
It's a whore's market. In most cases, lowest bid wins. There are exceptions (DOD, I am sure) but for the most part, governments are primarily looking at price.
They demand cheap. That's it. That's the formula to getting the government's business (any government). Got the cheapest product that will get the job done? Great, now if you're the lower bid, you'll get the business.
Microsoft isn't stupid. They can play in a whore's market too. With the margins they have on their products, hell, they can practically give it away and still make money.
I am as big a linux fan as anyone but do you honestly think that Microsoft's survival is at stake here? Highly doubtful, IMHO.
Think about it. You have one of the top five largest corporations in the WORLD (market cap). Let me repeat that: in the world. That company is worth $275 billion as of today. Cash reserves on-hand are $46 billion. In cash. As in, "Wow, Steve! Our statement is huge this month!". Think of how many hundred dollar bills that is. Microsoft employs over 50,000 people directly and, no doubt, hundreds of thousands more indirectly through consulting, help desk, services, and other software/services.
In other words, they are big, important, and so-far, very very smart. Oh yea, and don't forget rich.
Now I know Linux is a good OS (I use it!) and I am sure there are many areas where it is the *best* choice for an OS....but the idea of Linux alone "bringing down" Microsoft is suspect at best. There is much more that must go into a product (OS, Office, or otherwise) other than good programming, better technology, or the "right" philosophy behind building your product. It takes much more than that -- and Microsoft has all of those things. Linux does not. I'm not passing judgement as I am an avid user of Linux though I am stating fact. If you think that Redhat, IBM, SCO, or whoever is the flavor of the month can provide all of the "services" Microsoft can (and don't forget Marketing, PR, Lobbying, R&D, Investment capital, standards setting, and other functions that any large multi-national company must have to flourish) then I say to you ------------
Why has Microsoft been so successful over the past 20 years? Could it be because they are good at the things I mentioned above?
The point is: Microsoft is here, in one form or another, for a very very long time (unless the govt breaks them up). Their "survival" is far from at-risk, to say the least.
It doesn't matter. Eventually, Apple will turn it into a way to enrich itself....and then it will die.
This is a great service and a step in the right direction. However, there is a major flaw in the strategy. You see, this service works FANTASTIC -- but only if you use Apple.
And therein lies the problem. Apple has neither the production capability nor partnerships to make this happen. Yea, so I can burn it to CD (on my mac) and port it to my iPod (apple, too). Ok. But what about my portable mp3 player? Nope. What about my DVD/Mp3 player? Nope. What about my audiotron or home network? Nope. What about my PC? Nope. Can't do it.
customer "So I have to buy an apple product to use this?" -- yep. Sure do.
customer: "Screw that! Why do I have to buy something from Apple to do this? Oh - that's right. They're a hardware company too (that, incidentally, has a history of not being able to meet demand for its products)
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why this will ultimately fail in the long run. It's a DOA.
Yes, I agree....Skynet it is. But the tighter they squeeze, the more people get through. They most certainly don't have the resources to continually monitor every person and every technology out there. It's just too much -- even for them.
:-)
Meanwhile, I'll be cruising on by, hardly noticed, in my shiny old blue Ford Taurus.
After you read this, don't forget the fact that statistics can be used to prove anything
This whole site is dedicated to telling me that there are less lawsuits now than in the 70's and 80's. That is, undoubtedly true -- but not for the reasons you think. Could it be, perhaps, that most of the cases are settled out of court because of the extravagent cost of defending it?
Hmmm....
If you get sued for $50,000 and it would cost you $100,000 to defend yourself, wouldn't you settle out of court? I would.
Well, yes - we are the users - and if the RIAA goes after the users, then I liken this to speeding.
Sucks for the guy who is being made an example of but meanwhile, millions more of us are cruising on by just trying to stay under the radar.
Actually (assuming your question is legit and not flamebait), I appreciate the rhythymic tone of the lyrics. It makes my feet move and it has a very nice beat...
When I say I'm an audiophile, that means I love usic. All different kinds of music. I'm not a snob about the music I listen to. I don't like independent music just because its independent and I don't hate "big" music just because its big. I listen to what I like. Sometimes, that's Top-40 "garbage" as some call it, sometimes it's unheard-of local bands. I will say, however, that I tend to discard the Top-40 fairly quickly and it "gets old" to me after hearing it too many times.
I'm still waiting for an "objective" ratings house to help me with the selection of my music. While I am a TOTAL audiophile, I do not have the time to wade through mounds and mounds of crappy independent artists in order to find the 2-3 good songs I actually end up liking.
Take hip hop, for example. Now, I don't like ALL hip-hop, but I do like the "dance" hip hop songs that make my feet move. Gangsta rap? No. RnB? No. Soul? Nope. Don't like any of those....just a few of the "dance" tracks (think: In Da Club - by 50 cent). Right now, there is no easy way for me to identify, much less download this kind of music. I have to wade through piles and piles of crap (both independent and large record) to get what I want. Now, if there were a reputable "reviewage" site (ala the Billboard top 50 but more objective), I would have a use for it -- in a big way.
Hell, I might actually PAY for it!
Personally, I think this is the only way a middle man can survive in the music industry -- by providing a "service" to help people wade through the crap.
Perhaps it was the virus....
Amazon Tech: "We just can't get rid of this damn thing"
..and, exactly, what studies are you reading?
Ok, so given we can't violate the laws of thermodynamics, what if the phone charged itself while in your pocket - due to you moving around?
While most have pooh-pooh'ed this story due to the stupid vibration comment, I'm thinking of something similar to a Rolex watch. You walk and "vibrate" the phone with your kinetic energy. That moves a mechanism (presumably what this story is about) and your phone charges. Kinda like Rolex watches...
Disclaimer: IANAE - I am not an engineer.