As long as your query looks something like this...
SELECT * FROM mydata WHERE stuff LIKE '%YToyOntzOjc6InBhY2thZ2UiO3M6MjM5OiKyKHPh9ZawDX6KyA62cMd6p+mjBybGwJyCaNfFb7S.........
Seriously though, if I understand your objective I think it would be feasible to develop something like that, but I don't think its something you could integrate into Google's search services unless they added something on their end.
You could pass a decryption key along with your query and the server would then decrypt records as it performed the search. It would be very resource intensive.
As an close example, I have a web based password storage application in which I did not want to keep the encryption keys on the same server as the password database. So I generate a key with which to encrypt the records and the user keeps their key and must supply it every time they want to decrypt a record. I don't go so far as to enable searching of the encrypted data, I have a description field specifically for that purpose. The web application is called Passbox and is written in PHP.
A lot of the "additional" hardware costs were bullshit too.
Yeah, I noticed that too, but I figured I'd give them the benefit of the doubt as some Apple customers will want to stick with Apple labelled hardware.
On a related note I purchased a Mac Dual 1GHz G4 in the MDD case a few years back with a basic CD-RW/DVD-ROM, it did not have the "Super Drive" in it to burn DVDs. So I read up on the net about the actual hardware Apple used for the Super Drive, went out and purchased a Pioneer DVD+/-RW drive of the same model, popped it into the Mac and had my DVD burning capability at a reduced price from the Appled labelled Pioneer drive.
I've since sold that Mac as I was not impressed when some of the software I wanted to purchase for the Mac required a point upgrade in OSX and Apple wanted another $180 for the upgrade. No thanks.
How much do you think it costs to develop that software? It's not like MS magically doesn't pay 20-30 people to build the next version of Excel.
At what rate, $1 billion each annual salary? The gross margins are in no way justified by the development costs of past or future versions. And don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the crazy prices and profits Microsoft makes, lets just be honest about it.
They are quickly revealed to you post install, if your time is worth anything that is.
As they are with all of the operating systems if you don't have a clue what your are doing and you attempt to perform the installation yourself. Normally when you don't have a clue and you believe your time is more valuable than the cost of learning then you purchase a pre-installed system, whether it is OSX, Windows, Solaris, linux, or any other operating system.
In regards to the report, its mostly BS. The so called $3,367 Apple tax over five years is not hidden, its in the advertised price and customers knowingly pay it.
The problem with the report, $1,232 of so called hidden tax is in software purchases and yet none are listed in the cost of the Windows box. Yeah I know, the assumption is that the software is already purchased for the Windows box, that is a lame argument, I've seen Microsoft's revenue numbers for their office software, its a poor assumption that you will never need to buy software for Windows, in fact its absolutely ludicrous.
Then there is another $2,983 of so called hidden taxes which are in the price difference of the laptop and desktop purchase. Again, this is not hidden, its in the price and the customer knows they are paying it.
In the end if you remove the idiocy of the software cost and the up front known extra expense you are left with only $384 over five years of what somebody may consider a hidden tax due to higher priced Apple hardware that may be purchased in the future.
And now for the true hidden tax that both corporations are guilty of, the manufacturing costs to reproduce software is virtually $0, the price both companies charge for their software licensing are outrageously high and in some cases exceed $100 per license. The result, check the SEC filings for these companies and you'll find gross profit margins in excess of 95% in their software licensing. There is your hidden tax, and they both do it. Me, I'll stick with linux and open source applications where the customer isn't gouged with monopoly enforced taxes to support their fat gross margins. Of course my time is valuable, that is why I invested in an education to protect my interests from those of greedy MBAs who sell over priced and poorly developed software.
The "gaming of the system" may actually be by the lawmaker.
In reading the legislation that was proposed by Texas Representative Joe Barton, I believe you have it right. Section 1534 of HR 6 amended the Internal Revenue Code to allow for a 50 cent per gallon tax credit on alternative fuels but amazingly also added a paragraph that states in very clear terms that a taxpayer who uses an alternative fuel but does not take a tax credit will be paid 50 cents per gallon by the Secretary.
Title 26, Subtitle F, Chapter 65, Subchapter B, Section 6427, Subsection e, paragraph 2 (2) Alternative fuel If any person sells or uses an alternative fuel (as defined in section 6426 (d)(2)) for a purpose described in section 6426 (d)(1) in such person's trade or business, the Secretary shall pay (without interest) to such person an amount equal to the alternative fuel credit with respect to such fuel.
Since a tax credit had already been amended this paragraph was added intentionally to pay out tax dollars in place of providing a tax credit. This is not an incompetent mistake of a dumb government representative.
Chemical plants were better designed than nuclear power plants in part because Congress did not legislate how the chemical industry designed their plants. But more importantly most chemical firms of that era had CEO's with engineering degrees. They had respect for the technology and the risk of misusing it. But that doesn't make the chemical industry blameless. With the off-shoring of manufacturing a lot of chemical production is now being done in places where there is little respect for the dangers of technology. The chemical industry's TMI was Bhopal. There will be more Bhopal's coming because those companies are now being managed by bean counters, not engineers.
I wasn't there so I can't say Cringely is wrong about the government regulation of nuclear power, however, I have worked in the semiconductor industry which utilizes some of the deadliest chemicals known to man and their are mandated regulations from various government agencies, EPA, OSHA, etc., that result in the controls, interlocks, and containment systems used to make the industry safe. I'm also pretty sure that the issue in Bhopal was more a lack of regulation than a lack of respect for the dangers. There should have been powerful laws and inspectors to shut down the plant before it killed thousands.
Where we both do agree is on the belief that we can expect more Bhopal and economic melt down events due to bean counter management. Over the past 20 years I've noticed a managerial shift towards a focus on cutting costs and less of a focus on the technology and science behind the manufactured products. In the past two years I've engaged in heated debates with peers and managers over the purpose and focus of engineering resources. Its seems that decision makers are forgetting that the core of a technology based manufacturing corporation is the technology not the cutting of fixed costs by reducing head count, wages, service contracts, etc. Accounting and business management are tools to support the core skills, they are not the core themselves. When accounting and business management undermines the ability of a technology based business to develop and manufacture the core technology of their business you can expect a gradual degradation of the business until it is no longer viable.
I seriously don't know what you were reading but it wasn't Keir's blog posting. There was absolutely nothing in there about fanbois
I believe there is a bit of a misunderstanding here. First I was responding to a rant about fanbois making another slashdot reader nearly homicidal, second the slashdot reader and Keir's article about linux critics were both referring to what happened on Keir's blog when he posted the criticism of Firefox and Ubuntu, he was flamed by fanbois. I was not commenting on any statements by Keir about fanbois per se. But Keir was commenting on his conclusion that "there aren't many critics within the community" based on the fact that he was flamed on his blog by fanbois. Note to Keir and anyone else who is flamed by fanbois, fanbois posting on a blog != the linux community. And in fact there is criticism, debate, flaming, etc. within the linux development community, all one has to do is peruse the archives of the linux kernel mailing lists.
suggest the critic needs to grow a thicker skin with the implication that if the he doesn't like it, tough, and he should STFU.
Uh, no, you are reading much more into what I wrote. The fact is I was suggesting that the slashdot reader and Keir should basically go along with their business and not let the fanbois cause them grief or dismay. I in no way suggested that Keir STFU and actually quite the opposite suggested he simply ignore the flames.
I am now being modded in to the -1 basement as you read this, if you even read -1.
Looks to me that there was no modding what so ever. Oddly enough, I actually do have my threshold set to read -1 comments for the exact reasoning you suspected you would be modded to -1. For the most part comments that are modded down are deserving, but occasionally there are valuable comments that are trashed by fanbois.
The following things in Linux cause me deep concern, they never get fixed and they've pushed me, like a lot of hardcore Linux people to the Mac.... and I've had a Linux desktop for like 10 years
Similar background here, started playing with linux in 1997, purchased a used Power Mac dual 1GHz G4 in the MDD case. But the reasons were a bit different, either I was having fewer issues with linux or was able to resolve mine, I was simply interested to see what all the fuss was about with the new OSX. It was a nice system, other than the cooling fans that sounded like a vacuum cleaner when the system warmed up, but I sold it a few months back as I was not interested in paying for a simple OS update. I now run linux on all my systems from my laptop and desktop to the various servers and routers I use.
The whole GNOME versus KDE thing is pretty much killing desktop Linux
We hear that a lot, but I can't say I agree. Nobody is forced to use either so you pick the one you like.
GTK is a horrible toolkit to build anything on. I used to love KDE but it completely impaled itself with 4.0. I blame Trolltech for constantly changing their toolkit which trashed all the KDE code built on top of it, and KDE
I hear ya there. Its actually been awhile since I did any desktop application development but the QT Designer I used to create QT based applications was light years ahead of the GTK tools. Funny thing is though I preferred the Gnome desktop.:)
Linux Audio in particular and multimedia in general is a train wreck
Linux is definitely worse off than Windows or OSX in multimedia, but IMO the entire media market is a train wreck due to the antics both content providers and the developers who are feeding off their idiocy. I've had my fair share of pains setting up audio on some systems so you may have a valid point on the ALSA drivers. I would note howev
Not to be too critical, but it sure reads as if you also needs to calm down and take a breath. Fanboism has been around long before there was linux, unix, or even computers for that matter. And don't get me wrong, I too at times need to step back and simply ignore the illogical rants from all sides.
I read TFA and Keir's blog post to which he was referring and all I can say to Keir is that he needs to grow thicker skin. If he intends to continue as a journalist on any topic he'll need to train himself to ignore the rants that make no sense.
In reading the responses in his blog post I'd say he had comments from the open source user community but absolutely no comments from the open source developer community. And he had plenty of Apple and Windows fainbois joining in for some perverse circle jerking so I don't see any basis for the wide stroke with which he paints the open source community.
What Keir needs to understand is that criticism of open source is not going to be focused and centralized on his personal blog, it takes place within the developer community and all one has to do is read the archives of the mailing lists to see the flames of debate that take place within the developer community.
As far as convincing your PHB goes, I'd suggest you hit him up with the language he understands, fixed costs, gross margins, return on investment, pay back, etc. If he is making business decisions based on some end user's wailing on an obscure journalist blog you have much bigger problems than fanbois who get you tweaked.
So lets all just chill and let the fanbois be fanbois.
Hey douche bag, its 2009, those tired and pathetic comments did not hold any truth when they were first coined, today they are pathetic lies toss around by mental midgets. Not to worry, though you fear and loathe open source you can hold out for the prospect of landing a job mowing the lawn for one of the profitable open source software businesses. Landscaping is one area where your ignorance can't possible do any harm to yourself.
What is the point of putting out an ad to sell a product if you limit your market to those who are already using your product? Are they simply trying to stop the bleeding of market share?
Yeah, I know, there are ways to view the ad without buying Windows, no thanks.
Public works projects as a way of recovering from a recession has never worked. It didn't work for the Japanese in the 90's, they spent 10 years building roads and bridges and wondering why nothing was happening. It didn't work for us in the 30's. And it will never work.
Actually the New Deal did work. If you chart the spending from the New Deal against the unemployment rate, industrial output and real GDP and compare it to the recession that was throttling the nation prior to the New Deal you will see it was a huge success.
Of course there are those who deride the New Deal and the teachings of John Maynard Keynes but when you read and analyse their arguments there are puzzling and outright false conclusions and logic.
First and foremost, you don't have to be a Nobel Laureate Economist to realize the "no shit Sherlock" logic behind Keynesian Economics during a recession. When individuals and corporations stop spending and the government steps in to create demand by spending of course its going to create jobs and stimulate the economy. To argue otherwise you'd have to be an outright moron or so pathetically stubborn you'd refute the facts to your own detriment.
But an even deeper fallacy in the arguments presented by the Heritage Foundation are their circular references to their own reports to provide credibility to their own conclusions, assumptions that the lag in starting up an infrastructure project precludes it ever creating jobs even though jobs will be created for the planning and engineering long before a shovel breaks soil, and the absurdity that federal funds for state infrastructure projects will only offset existing state funds already approved for the project that will be shifted to other state expenses some how does not create jobs. Uh, hello, do these people even have brains? If the federal funds offset existing approved funds which are then shifted to other state spending didn't the total expenditure, demand, and job creation just double? So much for common sense logic.
And the Japanese and their lost decade was not created by Keynesian Economics, it was created by outrageous speculation in real estate and securities, loose credit policies and low interest rates to fuel the speculation, and the greed of those running the financial institutions who were benefiting from the churning of the credit. Compared to the United States, Japan was already using Keynesian Economics as their government spending, according to the Heritage Foundation, was already over 31% of GDP while the United States is traditionally between 18% and 20%. And then to call Japan's government spending "flamboyantly unrestrained" while in the same paragraph pointing out that some governments spend greater than 40% or 50% of GDP is ridiculous.
The funny thing about the Japanese and their exploding economic bubble at the end of the 1980s is the cuts in taxes they made at the same time they increased government spending to prop up the failing economy. One has to wonder how much of Japan's debt problem is related to decreased tax revenue which to this day have not returned to the levels they experienced during the mid 1980s.
Escaping that fact would mean developing the new open format, everyone agreeing to use it, formatting all new media in that format per default to try encourage its use, and then maybe in 5-10 years time when all but a few old devices support it, FAT can be dropped and the open format will be enough.
Open formats currently exist but the other steps will be difficult barriers.
I can't see it being able to happen any quicker than that, companies may just find it cheaper to pay MS until the patents expire than sink a load of cash into developing and pushing a new filesystem and hoping it pays off.
There is still the option of fighting the patents, they were deemed invalid twice before Microsoft's lawyers convinced the USPTO to reinstate them. Sadly, for any single vendor the licensing will be the cheapest solution, however, the wide array of manufacturers will continue to pay a much higher price overall due to the questionable use of the patent system by many corporations, Microsoft being only one of them.
pretty much all competition will be unilateral, from people like apple and sony, who're only interested in developing their own monopolies
Another unfortunate truth, however, competition is not always and does not have to be unilateral. The electronics industry, from semiconductor manufacturers to finished electronics manufacturers, are in many cases brutally competitive.
These may seem far fetched to you, but they are possibilities that become unpossibilities one you start switching devices to non-ubiquitous filesystem. So, here's the bigger question: why close those doors?
Its best to avoid making assumptions as to what someone else may find far fetched, I in no way disagree with the value of interoperabilty. The only reason linux and TomTom use FAT is for interoperability not because Microsoft has some amazing "IP" and everyone wants FAT. However, you do bring up an important point, the bigger question, why close those doors? Considering the threat to all the hardware manufacturers affected by the interoperability issues you highlight it seems its time to dump the dead weight baggage of Microsoft's FAT patent lunacy and bring an open format to ubiquity.
Usage of Linux in embedded development projects crossed a threshold this year, with more than 50% of the 812 respondents saying that they are currently using it. Usage of Linux has been growing year over year, but didn't cross the halfway mark until 2008. More than 61% believed their company would be using Linux within the next two years.
Hardware manufacturers are caught in a catch 22, decouple from the Microsoft monopoly and risk losing market as I assume you are suggesting or remain fully engaged in the Microsoft monopoly and have your margins, market, and product plans somewhat dictated by Microsoft.
As someone who has worked in the brutally competitive hardware industry for many years I can see that its time for hardware manufacturers to show some back bone and beat down the fat and lazy leech that Microsoft has become.
TomTom HOME is our free software program that gives you access to a huge array of services as well as the global community of TomTom users. It is the only tool you need to manage, update and personalize your TomTom to enjoy a premium navigation experience: buy and install maps, make back-ups, download free software updates, shop and much more.
Since a Tom Tom owner will be installing software on their PC or Mac anyhow the addition of an ext2 driver would be innocuous.
Actually the lawsuit is over multiple patents, some of which are the FAT patents, all of which are dubious...
United States Patent 6,175,789 Beckert , et al. January 16, 2001 Vehicle computer system with open platform architecture
United States Patent 7,054,745 Couckuyt , et al. May 30, 2006 Method and system for generating driving directions
United States Patent 6,704,032 Falcon , et al. March 9, 2004 Methods and arrangements for interacting with controllable objects within a graphical user interface environment using various input mechanisms
United States Patent 7,117,286 Falcon October 3, 2006 Portable computing device-integrated appliance
United States Patent 6,202,008 Beckert , et al. March 13, 2001 Vehicle computer system with wireless internet connectivity
United States Patent 5,579,517 Reynolds , et al. November 26, 1996 Common name space for long and short filenames
United States Patent 5,758,352 Reynolds , et al. May 26, 1998 Common name space for long and short filenames
United States Patent 6,256,642 Krueger , et al. July 3, 2001 Method and system for file system management using a flash-erasable, programmable, read-only memory
11. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Library at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Library by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Library.
Microsoft does have the presidence in their favor due to the final decision of the USPTO and forcing Lexar to pay them off for their lame patents, but only a fool would simply give in to extortion.
Actually Jack got his degree in Business while Bob got his degree in Computer Science.
Jack is a brown nosing back stabbing sneaky weasel who squirms his way up the ranks, he hob knobs and rubs elbows but doesn't really product much of anything.
Bob not only has a degree in a technology field but is truly interested in the science and develops productivity improving solutions for the business and on his own time delves into open source projects to expand his knowledge and skills.
Jack believes he is a mover and shaker, the epitome of capitalist success, Bob actually does things that impact the business and the computer science field, his work in and out of the business drives capitalism in multiple markets.
Just kidding, a bit. I agree that hard work often results in great rewards in a capitalist economic system, but capitalism is also replete with worthless parasitic twits who don't do jack and yet receive reward beyond belief while individuals who put in excessive effort receive a pittance of the wealth they actually generate.
Oh, and by the way, "...all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights...".
If you are running a business in the new Capitalist China and you prescribe to the new Greed is Good mentality you suspect that you can get away with watering down the milk and adding Melamine to make the protein count look good and sell more product at a lower price than competitors. Unfortunately the plan backfires and Sanlu Group is bankrupted by the scandal and the one time entrepreneur Tian Wenhua is sentenced to life imprisonment. The communist government tries to cover up the incident and amazingly points fingers at other countries but in the end it was the capitalist entrepreneurs that chose to taint their product with Melamine, not the communist government.
Remind me again how much money the United States Army nets each year... The Red Cross... Meals on Wheels Association of America...?
Hmm, I guess the goals of these organizations isn't simply greed and net profit. And amazingly there are many organizations that don't net a profit and yet they are not attacked for being Anti-capitalist. I suppose its just not that simple, is it.
There is another way to look at it. I've given to the Mozilla Foundation, I use their Firefox product as do many others. For some the benefit has been as simple as a better performing browser with fewer exploits for their choice of operating system. For me it plays a bigger role as it is part of an entire software package that has allowed me to avoid paying tens of thousands in software licensing fees for sub par quality software from companies like Microsoft to support their 95%+ gross margins and I have been able to take that cash that would have been used to line their pockets and purchase more and better hardware.
Gee, I guess capitalism is alive and well and non-profits don't necessarily mean anti-capitalism.
One of the key issues here is a huge misunderstanding of why the US clings to capitalism.
Key issues where, in the article or on Slashdot?
Actually if there are any misunderstandings its that the market model used by some software companies is Capitalism. The use of lawyers, lobbiests, and fake grass roots community organizations to crush competition and guide governments, individuals, and businesses away from alternative software products have lead a few software vendors far from the realm of capitalism and more into the realm of corporate based socialism and communism where they decide what is developed and what the price will be.
The fact is open source software is closer to capitalism than most proprietary software businesses because it puts ownership and control of the various pieces of a software market into the hands of those who actually produce the products and services in the market. Everyone is hung up on control of the code behind software when it is only a small part of the entire market. The reason people are hung up on control of the code is because it is the root of a business model that enables bullying of all other vendors down stream to produce gross margin profits for the single up stream software provider in excess of 95%. There is nothing wrong with such high profit margins, as long as your not the down stream hardware vendor who has to give up you profit margins just to sell a product. Remember a certain CEO and Software Architect decreeing that hardware vendors must reduce their prices as the future would eventually be free hardware supported by hefty software licensing fees? Okay so they left out the part about hefty fees for their software, what a crock.
The most natural form of such a system is a risk/reward system where work is done with the expectation of a possible reward. This is, for better or for worse, capitalism.
Actually no that is not specifically capitalism. In fact pretty much every system involves a risk/reward system where work is completed with the expectation of a reward. The difference is that capitalism puts ownership of the means of producing into private hands with the idea being individuals will take bigger risks and compete to create products and services for a market. If you take away the risk and competition your left with ownership which is rather close to communism, socialism, in some cases even slavery and serfdom.
Open Source is yet another example of such ideals. An opportunity where working together can strengthen the whole.
No and yes. Even a corporation that is privately owned with individuals paid to do a job involves cooperation for the benefit of all, its not a free for all. And open source is not communism or socialism as the developers are not told what to develop, what license to use or what they should charge. And while open source software is in many cases a community effort that benefits those within the community it breaks from one important caveat of most closed source software, after the software is developed it does not bleed off profits from every other down stream portion of the software market from distributors to hardware integration and system builders to end users.
If there was one way to sum it up, it would be "Together we stand. Divided we fall." Because at some point everyone, even enemies, have to work together
I suspect you are a little naive.:) Open Source is more like the wild west with bands of people who work together for their common good, individual wild cats who break away from the community or never manage to find a place where they fit but still produce open source code, and splinter groups where projects have split for any number of reasons.
Open Source is a realization that once a software application is developed it doesn't cost an exorbitant amount to reproduce, in fact with todays technology the cost of
The only way left to continue the desired cycle and free up credit would be to take resources from the rich, and give it to folks who would actually spend those resources in the process of just living day to day, which would open up the credit markets again, increase demand for products, and so on.
Interesting post Ryan. However, I disagree about the need to take resources from the rich or perhaps I look at it from a different perspective. The rich can keep what they have but the working class who are creating the wealth that flows predominantly into the pockets of a few need to have a more equitable portion of the wealth they help generate.
Sadly people have not been paying attention to their falling portion of the national wealth and were likely lulled into a false sense of security by the housing bubble. Unfortunately now that the bubble has burst the average citizen is getting two strikes for the outrageous household debt and the falling participation in the GDP of the nation. In some cases people get a third strike by losing their job.
Slashdot Mirror
As long as your query looks something like this...
SELECT * FROM mydata WHERE stuff LIKE '%YToyOntzOjc6InBhY2thZ2UiO3M6MjM5OiKyKHPh9ZawDX6KyA62cMd6p+mjBybGwJyCaNfFb7S.........
Seriously though, if I understand your objective I think it would be feasible to develop something like that, but I don't think its something you could integrate into Google's search services unless they added something on their end.
You could pass a decryption key along with your query and the server would then decrypt records as it performed the search. It would be very resource intensive.
As an close example, I have a web based password storage application in which I did not want to keep the encryption keys on the same server as the password database. So I generate a key with which to encrypt the records and the user keeps their key and must supply it every time they want to decrypt a record. I don't go so far as to enable searching of the encrypted data, I have a description field specifically for that purpose. The web application is called Passbox and is written in PHP.
Yeah, I noticed that too, but I figured I'd give them the benefit of the doubt as some Apple customers will want to stick with Apple labelled hardware.
On a related note I purchased a Mac Dual 1GHz G4 in the MDD case a few years back with a basic CD-RW/DVD-ROM, it did not have the "Super Drive" in it to burn DVDs. So I read up on the net about the actual hardware Apple used for the Super Drive, went out and purchased a Pioneer DVD+/-RW drive of the same model, popped it into the Mac and had my DVD burning capability at a reduced price from the Appled labelled Pioneer drive.
I've since sold that Mac as I was not impressed when some of the software I wanted to purchase for the Mac required a point upgrade in OSX and Apple wanted another $180 for the upgrade. No thanks.
At what rate, $1 billion each annual salary? The gross margins are in no way justified by the development costs of past or future versions. And don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the crazy prices and profits Microsoft makes, lets just be honest about it.
As they are with all of the operating systems if you don't have a clue what your are doing and you attempt to perform the installation yourself. Normally when you don't have a clue and you believe your time is more valuable than the cost of learning then you purchase a pre-installed system, whether it is OSX, Windows, Solaris, linux, or any other operating system.
In regards to the report, its mostly BS. The so called $3,367 Apple tax over five years is not hidden, its in the advertised price and customers knowingly pay it.
The problem with the report, $1,232 of so called hidden tax is in software purchases and yet none are listed in the cost of the Windows box. Yeah I know, the assumption is that the software is already purchased for the Windows box, that is a lame argument, I've seen Microsoft's revenue numbers for their office software, its a poor assumption that you will never need to buy software for Windows, in fact its absolutely ludicrous.
Then there is another $2,983 of so called hidden taxes which are in the price difference of the laptop and desktop purchase. Again, this is not hidden, its in the price and the customer knows they are paying it.
In the end if you remove the idiocy of the software cost and the up front known extra expense you are left with only $384 over five years of what somebody may consider a hidden tax due to higher priced Apple hardware that may be purchased in the future.
And now for the true hidden tax that both corporations are guilty of, the manufacturing costs to reproduce software is virtually $0, the price both companies charge for their software licensing are outrageously high and in some cases exceed $100 per license. The result, check the SEC filings for these companies and you'll find gross profit margins in excess of 95% in their software licensing. There is your hidden tax, and they both do it. Me, I'll stick with linux and open source applications where the customer isn't gouged with monopoly enforced taxes to support their fat gross margins. Of course my time is valuable, that is why I invested in an education to protect my interests from those of greedy MBAs who sell over priced and poorly developed software.
In reading the legislation that was proposed by Texas Representative Joe Barton, I believe you have it right. Section 1534 of HR 6 amended the Internal Revenue Code to allow for a 50 cent per gallon tax credit on alternative fuels but amazingly also added a paragraph that states in very clear terms that a taxpayer who uses an alternative fuel but does not take a tax credit will be paid 50 cents per gallon by the Secretary.
Title 26, Subtitle F, Chapter 65, Subchapter B, Section 6427, Subsection e, paragraph 2
(2) Alternative fuel
If any person sells or uses an alternative fuel (as defined in section 6426 (d)(2)) for a purpose described in section 6426 (d)(1) in such person's trade or business, the Secretary shall pay (without interest) to such person an amount equal to the alternative fuel credit with respect to such fuel.
Since a tax credit had already been amended this paragraph was added intentionally to pay out tax dollars in place of providing a tax credit. This is not an incompetent mistake of a dumb government representative.
I wasn't there so I can't say Cringely is wrong about the government regulation of nuclear power, however, I have worked in the semiconductor industry which utilizes some of the deadliest chemicals known to man and their are mandated regulations from various government agencies, EPA, OSHA, etc., that result in the controls, interlocks, and containment systems used to make the industry safe. I'm also pretty sure that the issue in Bhopal was more a lack of regulation than a lack of respect for the dangers. There should have been powerful laws and inspectors to shut down the plant before it killed thousands.
Where we both do agree is on the belief that we can expect more Bhopal and economic melt down events due to bean counter management. Over the past 20 years I've noticed a managerial shift towards a focus on cutting costs and less of a focus on the technology and science behind the manufactured products. In the past two years I've engaged in heated debates with peers and managers over the purpose and focus of engineering resources. Its seems that decision makers are forgetting that the core of a technology based manufacturing corporation is the technology not the cutting of fixed costs by reducing head count, wages, service contracts, etc. Accounting and business management are tools to support the core skills, they are not the core themselves. When accounting and business management undermines the ability of a technology based business to develop and manufacture the core technology of their business you can expect a gradual degradation of the business until it is no longer viable.
I believe there is a bit of a misunderstanding here. First I was responding to a rant about fanbois making another slashdot reader nearly homicidal, second the slashdot reader and Keir's article about linux critics were both referring to what happened on Keir's blog when he posted the criticism of Firefox and Ubuntu, he was flamed by fanbois. I was not commenting on any statements by Keir about fanbois per se. But Keir was commenting on his conclusion that "there aren't many critics within the community" based on the fact that he was flamed on his blog by fanbois. Note to Keir and anyone else who is flamed by fanbois, fanbois posting on a blog != the linux community. And in fact there is criticism, debate, flaming, etc. within the linux development community, all one has to do is peruse the archives of the linux kernel mailing lists.
Uh, no, you are reading much more into what I wrote. The fact is I was suggesting that the slashdot reader and Keir should basically go along with their business and not let the fanbois cause them grief or dismay. I in no way suggested that Keir STFU and actually quite the opposite suggested he simply ignore the flames.
Looks to me that there was no modding what so ever. Oddly enough, I actually do have my threshold set to read -1 comments for the exact reasoning you suspected you would be modded to -1. For the most part comments that are modded down are deserving, but occasionally there are valuable comments that are trashed by fanbois.
Similar background here, started playing with linux in 1997, purchased a used Power Mac dual 1GHz G4 in the MDD case. But the reasons were a bit different, either I was having fewer issues with linux or was able to resolve mine, I was simply interested to see what all the fuss was about with the new OSX. It was a nice system, other than the cooling fans that sounded like a vacuum cleaner when the system warmed up, but I sold it a few months back as I was not interested in paying for a simple OS update. I now run linux on all my systems from my laptop and desktop to the various servers and routers I use.
We hear that a lot, but I can't say I agree. Nobody is forced to use either so you pick the one you like.
I hear ya there. Its actually been awhile since I did any desktop application development but the QT Designer I used to create QT based applications was light years ahead of the GTK tools. Funny thing is though I preferred the Gnome desktop. :)
Linux is definitely worse off than Windows or OSX in multimedia, but IMO the entire media market is a train wreck due to the antics both content providers and the developers who are feeding off their idiocy. I've had my fair share of pains setting up audio on some systems so you may have a valid point on the ALSA drivers. I would note howev
Not to be too critical, but it sure reads as if you also needs to calm down and take a breath. Fanboism has been around long before there was linux, unix, or even computers for that matter. And don't get me wrong, I too at times need to step back and simply ignore the illogical rants from all sides.
I read TFA and Keir's blog post to which he was referring and all I can say to Keir is that he needs to grow thicker skin. If he intends to continue as a journalist on any topic he'll need to train himself to ignore the rants that make no sense.
In reading the responses in his blog post I'd say he had comments from the open source user community but absolutely no comments from the open source developer community. And he had plenty of Apple and Windows fainbois joining in for some perverse circle jerking so I don't see any basis for the wide stroke with which he paints the open source community.
What Keir needs to understand is that criticism of open source is not going to be focused and centralized on his personal blog, it takes place within the developer community and all one has to do is read the archives of the mailing lists to see the flames of debate that take place within the developer community.
As far as convincing your PHB goes, I'd suggest you hit him up with the language he understands, fixed costs, gross margins, return on investment, pay back, etc. If he is making business decisions based on some end user's wailing on an obscure journalist blog you have much bigger problems than fanbois who get you tweaked.
So lets all just chill and let the fanbois be fanbois.
Hey douche bag, its 2009, those tired and pathetic comments did not hold any truth when they were first coined, today they are pathetic lies toss around by mental midgets. Not to worry, though you fear and loathe open source you can hold out for the prospect of landing a job mowing the lawn for one of the profitable open source software businesses. Landscaping is one area where your ignorance can't possible do any harm to yourself.
So is it an ad for Windows or Silverlight?
What is the point of putting out an ad to sell a product if you limit your market to those who are already using your product? Are they simply trying to stop the bleeding of market share?
Yeah, I know, there are ways to view the ad without buying Windows, no thanks.
Actually the New Deal did work. If you chart the spending from the New Deal against the unemployment rate, industrial output and real GDP and compare it to the recession that was throttling the nation prior to the New Deal you will see it was a huge success.
Of course there are those who deride the New Deal and the teachings of John Maynard Keynes but when you read and analyse their arguments there are puzzling and outright false conclusions and logic.
First and foremost, you don't have to be a Nobel Laureate Economist to realize the "no shit Sherlock" logic behind Keynesian Economics during a recession. When individuals and corporations stop spending and the government steps in to create demand by spending of course its going to create jobs and stimulate the economy. To argue otherwise you'd have to be an outright moron or so pathetically stubborn you'd refute the facts to your own detriment.
But an even deeper fallacy in the arguments presented by the Heritage Foundation are their circular references to their own reports to provide credibility to their own conclusions, assumptions that the lag in starting up an infrastructure project precludes it ever creating jobs even though jobs will be created for the planning and engineering long before a shovel breaks soil, and the absurdity that federal funds for state infrastructure projects will only offset existing state funds already approved for the project that will be shifted to other state expenses some how does not create jobs. Uh, hello, do these people even have brains? If the federal funds offset existing approved funds which are then shifted to other state spending didn't the total expenditure, demand, and job creation just double? So much for common sense logic.
And the Japanese and their lost decade was not created by Keynesian Economics, it was created by outrageous speculation in real estate and securities, loose credit policies and low interest rates to fuel the speculation, and the greed of those running the financial institutions who were benefiting from the churning of the credit. Compared to the United States, Japan was already using Keynesian Economics as their government spending, according to the Heritage Foundation, was already over 31% of GDP while the United States is traditionally between 18% and 20%. And then to call Japan's government spending "flamboyantly unrestrained" while in the same paragraph pointing out that some governments spend greater than 40% or 50% of GDP is ridiculous.
The funny thing about the Japanese and their exploding economic bubble at the end of the 1980s is the cuts in taxes they made at the same time they increased government spending to prop up the failing economy. One has to wonder how much of Japan's debt problem is related to decreased tax revenue which to this day have not returned to the levels they experienced during the mid 1980s.
Open formats currently exist but the other steps will be difficult barriers.
There is still the option of fighting the patents, they were deemed invalid twice before Microsoft's lawyers convinced the USPTO to reinstate them. Sadly, for any single vendor the licensing will be the cheapest solution, however, the wide array of manufacturers will continue to pay a much higher price overall due to the questionable use of the patent system by many corporations, Microsoft being only one of them.
Another unfortunate truth, however, competition is not always and does not have to be unilateral. The electronics industry, from semiconductor manufacturers to finished electronics manufacturers, are in many cases brutally competitive.
Its best to avoid making assumptions as to what someone else may find far fetched, I in no way disagree with the value of interoperabilty. The only reason linux and TomTom use FAT is for interoperability not because Microsoft has some amazing "IP" and everyone wants FAT. However, you do bring up an important point, the bigger question, why close those doors? Considering the threat to all the hardware manufacturers affected by the interoperability issues you highlight it seems its time to dump the dead weight baggage of Microsoft's FAT patent lunacy and bring an open format to ubiquity.
April 16, 2008 ELC: Trends in embedded Linux
December 04 2003 Microsoft to Charge for FAT File System
January 11, 2006 Microsoft's FAT Patent Upheld
January 13, 2006 FAT Patent Means Hardware Dollars For Microsoft
February 20, 2007 Ballmer repeats threats against Linux
February 25, 2009 Microsoft sues TomTom over Linux and other patent claims
Hardware manufacturers are caught in a catch 22, decouple from the Microsoft monopoly and risk losing market as I assume you are suggesting or remain fully engaged in the Microsoft monopoly and have your margins, market, and product plans somewhat dictated by Microsoft.
As someone who has worked in the brutally competitive hardware industry for many years I can see that its time for hardware manufacturers to show some back bone and beat down the fat and lazy leech that Microsoft has become.
Tom Tom Home
Since a Tom Tom owner will be installing software on their PC or Mac anyhow the addition of an ext2 driver would be innocuous.
Actually the lawsuit is over multiple patents, some of which are the FAT patents, all of which are dubious...
United States Patent 6,175,789
Beckert , et al. January 16, 2001
Vehicle computer system with open platform architecture
United States Patent 7,054,745
Couckuyt , et al. May 30, 2006
Method and system for generating driving directions
United States Patent 6,704,032
Falcon , et al. March 9, 2004
Methods and arrangements for interacting with controllable objects within a graphical user interface environment using various input mechanisms
United States Patent 7,117,286
Falcon October 3, 2006
Portable computing device-integrated appliance
United States Patent 6,202,008
Beckert , et al. March 13, 2001
Vehicle computer system with wireless internet connectivity
United States Patent 5,579,517
Reynolds , et al. November 26, 1996
Common name space for long and short filenames
United States Patent 5,758,352
Reynolds , et al. May 26, 1998
Common name space for long and short filenames
United States Patent 6,256,642
Krueger , et al. July 3, 2001
Method and system for file system management using a flash-erasable, programmable, read-only memory
Mac OS X drivers and Windows drivers are available for ext2. FAT is not absolutely necessary for cross platform compatible file storage hardware.
German federal patent court declares Microsoft FAT patent invalid
Setting aside the idiocy in assuming that the patents are valid after being rejected twice by the USPTO before finally being revalidated and ...
GPL V2 Terms and Conditions
11. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Library at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Library by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Library.
Microsoft does have the presidence in their favor due to the final decision of the USPTO and forcing Lexar to pay them off for their lame patents, but only a fool would simply give in to extortion.
Actually Jack got his degree in Business while Bob got his degree in Computer Science.
Jack is a brown nosing back stabbing sneaky weasel who squirms his way up the ranks, he hob knobs and rubs elbows but doesn't really product much of anything.
Bob not only has a degree in a technology field but is truly interested in the science and develops productivity improving solutions for the business and on his own time delves into open source projects to expand his knowledge and skills.
Jack believes he is a mover and shaker, the epitome of capitalist success, Bob actually does things that impact the business and the computer science field, his work in and out of the business drives capitalism in multiple markets.
Just kidding, a bit. I agree that hard work often results in great rewards in a capitalist economic system, but capitalism is also replete with worthless parasitic twits who don't do jack and yet receive reward beyond belief while individuals who put in excessive effort receive a pittance of the wealth they actually generate.
Oh, and by the way, "...all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights...".
If you are running a business in the new Capitalist China and you prescribe to the new Greed is Good mentality you suspect that you can get away with watering down the milk and adding Melamine to make the protein count look good and sell more product at a lower price than competitors. Unfortunately the plan backfires and Sanlu Group is bankrupted by the scandal and the one time entrepreneur Tian Wenhua is sentenced to life imprisonment. The communist government tries to cover up the incident and amazingly points fingers at other countries but in the end it was the capitalist entrepreneurs that chose to taint their product with Melamine, not the communist government.
Fixed that for you.
See where open source can lead.
BSD --> NeXT --> OSX --> AAPL
Remind me again how much money the United States Army nets each year... The Red Cross... Meals on Wheels Association of America...?
Hmm, I guess the goals of these organizations isn't simply greed and net profit. And amazingly there are many organizations that don't net a profit and yet they are not attacked for being Anti-capitalist. I suppose its just not that simple, is it.
There is another way to look at it. I've given to the Mozilla Foundation, I use their Firefox product as do many others. For some the benefit has been as simple as a better performing browser with fewer exploits for their choice of operating system. For me it plays a bigger role as it is part of an entire software package that has allowed me to avoid paying tens of thousands in software licensing fees for sub par quality software from companies like Microsoft to support their 95%+ gross margins and I have been able to take that cash that would have been used to line their pockets and purchase more and better hardware.
Gee, I guess capitalism is alive and well and non-profits don't necessarily mean anti-capitalism.
Key issues where, in the article or on Slashdot?
Actually if there are any misunderstandings its that the market model used by some software companies is Capitalism. The use of lawyers, lobbiests, and fake grass roots community organizations to crush competition and guide governments, individuals, and businesses away from alternative software products have lead a few software vendors far from the realm of capitalism and more into the realm of corporate based socialism and communism where they decide what is developed and what the price will be.
The fact is open source software is closer to capitalism than most proprietary software businesses because it puts ownership and control of the various pieces of a software market into the hands of those who actually produce the products and services in the market. Everyone is hung up on control of the code behind software when it is only a small part of the entire market. The reason people are hung up on control of the code is because it is the root of a business model that enables bullying of all other vendors down stream to produce gross margin profits for the single up stream software provider in excess of 95%. There is nothing wrong with such high profit margins, as long as your not the down stream hardware vendor who has to give up you profit margins just to sell a product. Remember a certain CEO and Software Architect decreeing that hardware vendors must reduce their prices as the future would eventually be free hardware supported by hefty software licensing fees? Okay so they left out the part about hefty fees for their software, what a crock.
Actually no that is not specifically capitalism. In fact pretty much every system involves a risk/reward system where work is completed with the expectation of a reward. The difference is that capitalism puts ownership of the means of producing into private hands with the idea being individuals will take bigger risks and compete to create products and services for a market. If you take away the risk and competition your left with ownership which is rather close to communism, socialism, in some cases even slavery and serfdom.
No and yes. Even a corporation that is privately owned with individuals paid to do a job involves cooperation for the benefit of all, its not a free for all. And open source is not communism or socialism as the developers are not told what to develop, what license to use or what they should charge. And while open source software is in many cases a community effort that benefits those within the community it breaks from one important caveat of most closed source software, after the software is developed it does not bleed off profits from every other down stream portion of the software market from distributors to hardware integration and system builders to end users.
I suspect you are a little naive. :) Open Source is more like the wild west with bands of people who work together for their common good, individual wild cats who break away from the community or never manage to find a place where they fit but still produce open source code, and splinter groups where projects have split for any number of reasons.
Open Source is a realization that once a software application is developed it doesn't cost an exorbitant amount to reproduce, in fact with todays technology the cost of
This reminds me of the Altered Reality Quake suit that was mentioned in a 2002 slashdot article.
Interesting post Ryan. However, I disagree about the need to take resources from the rich or perhaps I look at it from a different perspective. The rich can keep what they have but the working class who are creating the wealth that flows predominantly into the pockets of a few need to have a more equitable portion of the wealth they help generate.
By just about any economic measure the majority of the citizens in the United States have experienced a gradual decline in their share of the wealth generated by this country. This has resulted in a decrease in disposable household income which I believe individuals have attempted to make up for by utilizing credit.
Sadly people have not been paying attention to their falling portion of the national wealth and were likely lulled into a false sense of security by the housing bubble. Unfortunately now that the bubble has burst the average citizen is getting two strikes for the outrageous household debt and the falling participation in the GDP of the nation. In some cases people get a third strike by losing their job.