We are also very committed to respect for others' intellectual property and we request the same respect applied to our innovations.
I'm sure that they were "respecting" IBM's IP when they assisted Compaq and the other clone makers by adapting their MSDOS to run on the "unlicensed" clone boxes.
If this ran Linux it might be news for the novelty. Running XP just makes it a big fat target for MS, unless that's the plan by looking at his record.
MS has already declared war on PC gaming when they created XBox after using us all for DirectX testing. This would only speed up the process more by fracturing the already fragile PC games market. What game producer can support the platform duality? Even the big ones like EA have to port PC stuff to consoles just because a drop in the console market is a huge percent compaired to PC sales.
We've already got AOL and Gamespy for pay-to-play games, not even that part is novel. The only novel thing about the box is DRM...and nobody wants that! People would rather pay $400 for an e-machine than for another "console".
People that create these schemes underestimate the power of retail! The ability to put something new and shiny in your hands is a fundamental ingredient of electronic entertainment. It's also a social thing of going to the local game store, browsing the aisles, and chatting with the usual people.
Other than missing a few commas and maybe some whitespace, my post was more or less proper english grammar. If you ever had more to say than cheap one -liners you would know this!
Many of the top 10 games list are great for kids. Look at Sims, Warcraft, Rollercoaster Tycoon, etc. Kids love that kind of open-ended gameplay. The trouble is that there's no kid-friendly mode of playing. What would it take for a "dollhouse" Sims mod with simplier objectives and interfaces? How about a "toy soldier" style Warcraft 3 mod...same game with more play objectives. They're great games...that's why adults like them. Why wouldn't kids like them too!
This makes you wonder why there is so much anti-videogame sentiment, and its sad that its only now that more people are looking seriously toward computer games for child learning.
Even when I play myself, I have to have gibs and taunts turned off or my kids will be repeating the stuff all day long. It is a powerful learning tool--be careful what their learning!
To be fair to property owners, the court should force MS to payout 120% of it's cash on hand as dividends all in 1 quarter. Then they should prohibit MS from buying, aquiring rights to, etc anything no copyrights, companies, patents--nada, zilch! Breaking MS up without taking the all the cash is pointless--look at the Baby bells for the results... As soon as MS looses all it's cash, it won't be able to sustain the huge losses it's taking trying to grab more markets. The stock market will ignore it just as fast as they lauded it [wall street is funny that way] and the employees will demand their stock options and finish gutting the company. Meanwhile, the stockholders will invest all MS profit in other compainies, cars, toys, etc.. the economy will pick up. This would be Republican trickle-down economics at it's best! George could even have MS pay the dividends in half plane tickets to help subsidize that industry!
There comes a point in cooking where one more spice, one more ingredient takes away from the whole rather than adds to it. I believe several languages lately have had that problem. Perl has obviously gone too far--and lost it's simplicity, and it looks like PHP is going the same way as well. Maybe PHP 4 is good enough to call "done" If it gets much more complex, new users will be confused and something else will take it's place. That's why BASIC has been around forever it seems--It's not the greatest, but it stays put so everyone can start somewhere!
Many of the.com era technologies are great ideas, but need development in to lean, mean, systems. I'd propose a 3-5 year hold on any new versions just to let the environment settle down and give time to let the systems grow from "really good" to "legendary".
This is a contract dispute not an anti-trust judgement! Early on in Win95-dom MS saw java and willingly paid Sun to create an implementation because even they thought it would be the next-big-thing. MS proceded to issue an "extened" version of java that pissed sun off. Yes, sun did have in the contract a technology "we-don't-like-it" clause. According to the willingly signed contract by MS they were to modify their JVM if asked by sun.
sun signed up for exposure not just the money! MS knowingly and willingly sabotaged that exposure causing everyone to thing that Java sucks because they never intended to support the contract to their fullest ability!
MS already committed to bundle java. At the time sun got them to stop, there was no.Net. Now MS has a competing tech [directly based on Suns JVM tecnique on top of that!] Now sun simply wants it's JVM inserted to fufill the contract. That would seem on all counts to be very fair and equitable.
why would MS fight this if they wern't sabotaging java? This isn't quite like netscape. MS never promised to ship netscape like they did with java-that's the difference. This is just like the smartphone case where MS was double-dealing behind their partner's back. The fact that MS is now a convicted monopolist only streangthens sun's position. If they weren't trying to monoploize VMs then this remedy wouldn't be an issue. MS is reniging on a perfectly valid contract--that is all this is about!
Sure, slack back on govt regulations, as long as the govt would stop constructing petty things like patents, trademarks, and copyrights as well as stop wasting their time enforcing things like mortgage forclosures, car repos, etc...After all those things are a big drain on government resources too!
I think that both sides are getting at the fact that people are the IT department not all the computers, networks, and software.
MS & co have been selling the "myth" of IT as a "thing" that you just buy and plug in. I've found most bosses want to throw money at IT and then complain about it instead of taking the time to understand what tools they use and need.
I find the ROI to be a myth also. Computers only make a company money because they promote and enforce disipline to the companies policies. Unfortunatly, computers have had exactly the opposite effect because they have mostly been used to "fix" bad management decisions "faster" and rather than learn from the mistake, management throws more money at the "problem" instead of fixing their own problems.
The companies that make huge "ROI" gains are typically disiplined enough to make the same gains with or without computers. The computer is an important tool like phones, or assembly lines that some companies learn to master while other companies buy the "toys" but never learn to master them.
Re:Like it or not, managers default to commercial
on
What is Open Source?
·
· Score: 1
But this could show that OSS is good for the small contractor/ programming house!
The manager has clout over the developers because they are only supporting probably under 100 customers! a $100k check is a big deal--and a meal. They are more willing to work with customers financially (take payments) and that gives some leverage to the customer to hold up the checks (after the first ones have cleared...) if things don't work as promised. It's a carrot-stick thing. [like if your software takes out the business before they finish paying you. that's incentive!] This is capitalism in it's truest form and at it's best!
at the same time OSS would fit nicely in smaller shops development model. The OSS toolset is cheaper, the only "cost" being to return some of the code you patch. If spun properly it could even be a marketing tool. In most cases the "customers" aren't going to sell out your code--they weren't smart enough to write it in the first place...the CD would most likely end up at the bottom of a drawer somewhere. They're after the relationship with the vendor--they really want to pay somebody else to worry about the code....and again, some common sense applies because while the code is OSS, understanding their business' needs isn't something that can be "canned".
After hanging out here for a while, that could be a good business to "can" OSS and sell the package deal to businesses using OSS. There's several people here that do it, if you're good and responsive there's got to be money in it. People are fed up with big business software for exactly this reason. [it's why I have a job! my boss doesn't want to just pay a mindless mega corp.]
Because there's smoke billowing out of the lobby broom closet, and instead of telling the patrons, they're scooting you out the door to shut you up while everyone else fries, while preveneting you from telling your girlfriend who's still in there! While at the same time telling people in the theater not to come out--everything is OK...No, those aren't firetrucks out front!
Plus it gives you the points for doing the work of invention--and typically you can still patent something of your own out of the deal.
Also, software patents aren't even legal in europe yet, so it is right of him to ignore them for now. The lack of knowladge also gives them credit in court--What a joke software patents really are when a bunch of college kids reinvent them overnight in their dorm rooms. Without specific implementation [this code on that machine...] software patents are worthless...IBM, MS and everyone else knows this..they'll never touch Linux. It's the Emperor's New Clothes for the whole industry and the big players know this!
The only reason this is a big deal is that Enron Execs hyped it to investors with $$$$. If it was just to us little people it would have been OK. Don't kid yourselves.
seems from the previous posts that this was a while in the making.
You've got a cash-strapped company, temp workers, and a boss with an attitude--you can expect this to happen.
Most small business owners are in business because they can't cut following someone else's rules. It's good for starting businesses, but bad for keeping them. My experience is that when the boss utters "you don't have to work here" one too many times, it's the other 6 employees nearby that take the advice rather than the intended one!
It sounds like self-preservation as much as revenge. After all, if he's not renewing contracts, then eventually your dinner stops! They choose to gang up and go out with a bang rather than a whimper.
If some one could just say which files were infected that would actually be better for Linux. At that point we could make a two step rewrite process!
1. coders involved in the process would write out the specs and then get clear. The IO specs would go to...
2. Newbies who haven't seen either code base! Rewrite the functions then take their code pages to a notary public for signoff. Then snail-mail the code directly to Linus! That would be difficult to write highlevel code for mear newbies, but it would ensure that the code was free from future litigation.
remember too that Linus' view of software patents is one of unreasonableness. Current practice is for "black-box" style patents, so generic that they wouldn't actually hold up in court, when every other field requires documentation of specific prints and implementations. It's common in other businesses to change just one implementation device to comply, yet software patents are mysteriously lacking this ability at the PTO.
The only real way to get the issue under control is to have a newbie coder sit in-court and rewrite something from scratch from just a vague description while the judge is watching. It may very well be such a Linux case that finally pushes this to happen!
But in most cases, my shop at least...OpenOffice is just as easy to use as MS word for what 80% of people do. Most offices use MS Office for pretty pictues, memos, and numbers in boxes.
My boss flipped out at the $379 for a copy of Office pro with his new computer, You have to have it for business communications, but at the same time, nobody will say to the office staff to stop generating more MS Office junk--keeping the problem going! Now of course, we got MS office, so telling them not to use it is pointless. Worse, it's XP which means they're creating documents that won't work with half the shop using 97...They won't learn the free stuff, but won't live without some silly new MS "feature"
The problem is that you purposefully have to make a vendetta against the MS stuff to stop it from spreading and costing you more! It makes everyone upset and basicly makes you an ass, but what else can you do?
There needs to be an OpenOffice.org training site or something. I have some ideas, but I myself don't know OO.org well enough to use it fully.
poor guy is being forced to sign with the contract firm that's "buying" his job. He's thrice screwed. First, he's loosing out on his current contract with the employeer. Second, the contractor has already coluded with the company on his wages, benifits, etc. without allowing him to negotiate with the new contractors. And third, they are a large firm and he's basicly refusing work from them, even though he never solicited it and again is limited from presuing other work as they tie up the market and won't position him elsewhere for his benifit even if he does take the layoff.
It's really too bad that he doesn't have a lot of money to sue these people into the ground. If he was a corp, he could sue both of them an win, but he's not.
SCO in Germany cannot publish comments about the american case that they can't back up under German laws. That's the issue here. If SCO's german shell company is issuing letters to german companies then they have to abide by german law and "put-up-or-shut-up!" And because the case is in an american court, american gag orders don't apply to the german company branch.
They've already made the comments and issued the letters, so under german law, they need to retract or show some evidence of their claims due to the german business laws. All-in-all it's a neat end run around SCO's abuse of the american legal system.
Why would they pay the time to learn open source and be free if Billy will just give them a "hit" for free.
Why won't they change from their pirated ways? Because they expect Bill [or someone else, not just MS] to overlook that because they're NPO. So they should get special treatment. Learning to be free is too much work!
Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity.
I like it! Many of our current issues from Coke to MS to Iraq are more related to My lawyer's machine calling your lawyer's machine [i.e. Toby/spidie] and the pandering reaction of the media than outright planned malace.
In my experience, most executive management is like Homer Simpson, they'll shout at the TV [or execuutive assistants] with outrageous comments that then get followed as Law. They're really nice guys, but are totally insulated from the effect that their actions have on everyone else. Kinda like a road-rage thing. You don't really mean what you shout out do you? At least if you think about it, you'd be embarased if that was quoted in good company....only with all our jobs, lives, health, etc...
So yes, it's worse than mal1ce...they were to self-centered, opinionated, and power-drunk to even to even realize that you existed to hurt in the first place!
This isn't about trolling, this is a real problem! Open Source Software is under the microscope right now!
No matter what RMS-preceived wrongs are going on in the open source world, changing licensing rules now is just stupid. Businesses don't deal in grey. They want black and white, especially if the idea is new. This has been a trend on news posts for the last nine months!
realize too, for every one of these articles [there's been 3-4 this year!] that 10 other companies are reading this and reconsidering whether to jump on board OSS or not. The single enemy left of OSS is itself!
This companies example is a model for how alot of other companies could do business...and now the community is biting them back for it. There has to be compromise, and these guys seem to have found it. How does deciding years later that they aren't "good enough" for GNU look to the rest of the business world? Is this how OSS treats it's friends?
Of sloppy, cheap marketing and rushed engineering instead of solid hardware design!
This is like winmodems. They are "cheaper" just to save a few dimes instead of being truly independant devices. They want to save a buck by making these wireless cards merely transmitters, and relying on the embedding company to "finish" the product. The integrators don't want to share, because they all use the same chips, so software is the only defining quality between their products! Unfortunately, this doesn't look like it will change any time soon. BillyG has every one addicted to cheap hardware instead of paying for quality.
Why can't some one make a wireless card that acts like the routers. That accepts normal 100Mbs cat5 and automagically makes it wireless? That would seem like the answer as then it would "just work" and the drivers would just be to set the security settings.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure that they were "respecting" IBM's IP when they assisted Compaq and the other clone makers by adapting their MSDOS to run on the "unlicensed" clone boxes.
Turnabout is fair play...but it usually sucks!
MS has already declared war on PC gaming when they created XBox after using us all for DirectX testing. This would only speed up the process more by fracturing the already fragile PC games market. What game producer can support the platform duality? Even the big ones like EA have to port PC stuff to consoles just because a drop in the console market is a huge percent compaired to PC sales.
We've already got AOL and Gamespy for pay-to-play games, not even that part is novel. The only novel thing about the box is DRM...and nobody wants that! People would rather pay $400 for an e-machine than for another "console".
People that create these schemes underestimate the power of retail! The ability to put something new and shiny in your hands is a fundamental ingredient of electronic entertainment. It's also a social thing of going to the local game store, browsing the aisles, and chatting with the usual people.
Duh! They legally have too or they go to jail for breaking Federal law! That's the point of the lawsuit--it's not fair what they're paying.
Many of the top 10 games list are great for kids. Look at Sims, Warcraft, Rollercoaster Tycoon, etc. Kids love that kind of open-ended gameplay. The trouble is that there's no kid-friendly mode of playing. What would it take for a "dollhouse" Sims mod with simplier objectives and interfaces? How about a "toy soldier" style Warcraft 3 mod...same game with more play objectives. They're great games...that's why adults like them. Why wouldn't kids like them too!
To be fair to property owners, the court should force MS to payout 120% of it's cash on hand as dividends all in 1 quarter. Then they should prohibit MS from buying, aquiring rights to, etc anything no copyrights, companies, patents--nada, zilch! Breaking MS up without taking the all the cash is pointless--look at the Baby bells for the results...
As soon as MS looses all it's cash, it won't be able to sustain the huge losses it's taking trying to grab more markets. The stock market will ignore it just as fast as they lauded it [wall street is funny that way] and the employees will demand their stock options and finish gutting the company.
Meanwhile, the stockholders will invest all MS profit in other compainies, cars, toys, etc.. the economy will pick up. This would be Republican trickle-down economics at it's best! George could even have MS pay the dividends in half plane tickets to help subsidize that industry!
There comes a point in cooking where one more spice, one more ingredient takes away from the whole rather than adds to it. I believe several languages lately have had that problem. Perl has obviously gone too far--and lost it's simplicity, and it looks like PHP is going the same way as well. Maybe PHP 4 is good enough to call "done" If it gets much more complex, new users will be confused and something else will take it's place. That's why BASIC has been around forever it seems--It's not the greatest, but it stays put so everyone can start somewhere!
Many of the .com era technologies are great ideas, but need development in to lean, mean, systems. I'd propose a 3-5 year hold on any new versions just to let the environment settle down and give time to let the systems grow from "really good" to "legendary".
sun signed up for exposure not just the money! MS knowingly and willingly sabotaged that exposure causing everyone to thing that Java sucks because they never intended to support the contract to their fullest ability!
MS already committed to bundle java. At the time sun got them to stop, there was no .Net. Now MS has a competing tech [directly based on Suns JVM tecnique on top of that!] Now sun simply wants it's JVM inserted to fufill the contract. That would seem on all counts to be very fair and equitable.
why would MS fight this if they wern't sabotaging java? This isn't quite like netscape. MS never promised to ship netscape like they did with java-that's the difference. This is just like the smartphone case where MS was double-dealing behind their partner's back. The fact that MS is now a convicted monopolist only streangthens sun's position. If they weren't trying to monoploize VMs then this remedy wouldn't be an issue. MS is reniging on a perfectly valid contract--that is all this is about!
Funny how those pesky govt regulations work huh?
MS & co have been selling the "myth" of IT as a "thing" that you just buy and plug in. I've found most bosses want to throw money at IT and then complain about it instead of taking the time to understand what tools they use and need.
I find the ROI to be a myth also. Computers only make a company money because they promote and enforce disipline to the companies policies. Unfortunatly, computers have had exactly the opposite effect because they have mostly been used to "fix" bad management decisions "faster" and rather than learn from the mistake, management throws more money at the "problem" instead of fixing their own problems.
The companies that make huge "ROI" gains are typically disiplined enough to make the same gains with or without computers. The computer is an important tool like phones, or assembly lines that some companies learn to master while other companies buy the "toys" but never learn to master them.
The manager has clout over the developers because they are only supporting probably under 100 customers! a $100k check is a big deal--and a meal. They are more willing to work with customers financially (take payments) and that gives some leverage to the customer to hold up the checks (after the first ones have cleared...) if things don't work as promised. It's a carrot-stick thing. [like if your software takes out the business before they finish paying you. that's incentive!] This is capitalism in it's truest form and at it's best!
at the same time OSS would fit nicely in smaller shops development model. The OSS toolset is cheaper, the only "cost" being to return some of the code you patch. If spun properly it could even be a marketing tool. In most cases the "customers" aren't going to sell out your code--they weren't smart enough to write it in the first place...the CD would most likely end up at the bottom of a drawer somewhere. They're after the relationship with the vendor--they really want to pay somebody else to worry about the code....and again, some common sense applies because while the code is OSS, understanding their business' needs isn't something that can be "canned".
After hanging out here for a while, that could be a good business to "can" OSS and sell the package deal to businesses using OSS. There's several people here that do it, if you're good and responsive there's got to be money in it. People are fed up with big business software for exactly this reason. [it's why I have a job! my boss doesn't want to just pay a mindless mega corp.]
Because there's smoke billowing out of the lobby broom closet, and instead of telling the patrons, they're scooting you out the door to shut you up while everyone else fries, while preveneting you from telling your girlfriend who's still in there! While at the same time telling people in the theater not to come out--everything is OK...No, those aren't firetrucks out front!
Also, software patents aren't even legal in europe yet, so it is right of him to ignore them for now. The lack of knowladge also gives them credit in court--What a joke software patents really are when a bunch of college kids reinvent them overnight in their dorm rooms. Without specific implementation [this code on that machine...] software patents are worthless...IBM, MS and everyone else knows this..they'll never touch Linux. It's the Emperor's New Clothes for the whole industry and the big players know this!
The only reason this is a big deal is that Enron Execs hyped it to investors with $$$$. If it was just to us little people it would have been OK. Don't kid yourselves.
You've got a cash-strapped company, temp workers, and a boss with an attitude--you can expect this to happen.
Most small business owners are in business because they can't cut following someone else's rules. It's good for starting businesses, but bad for keeping them. My experience is that when the boss utters "you don't have to work here" one too many times, it's the other 6 employees nearby that take the advice rather than the intended one!
It sounds like self-preservation as much as revenge. After all, if he's not renewing contracts, then eventually your dinner stops! They choose to gang up and go out with a bang rather than a whimper.
1. coders involved in the process would write out the specs and then get clear. The IO specs would go to...
2. Newbies who haven't seen either code base! Rewrite the functions then take their code pages to a notary public for signoff. Then snail-mail the code directly to Linus! That would be difficult to write highlevel code for mear newbies, but it would ensure that the code was free from future litigation.
remember too that Linus' view of software patents is one of unreasonableness. Current practice is for "black-box" style patents, so generic that they wouldn't actually hold up in court, when every other field requires documentation of specific prints and implementations. It's common in other businesses to change just one implementation device to comply, yet software patents are mysteriously lacking this ability at the PTO.
The only real way to get the issue under control is to have a newbie coder sit in-court and rewrite something from scratch from just a vague description while the judge is watching. It may very well be such a Linux case that finally pushes this to happen!
My boss flipped out at the $379 for a copy of Office pro with his new computer, You have to have it for business communications, but at the same time, nobody will say to the office staff to stop generating more MS Office junk--keeping the problem going! Now of course, we got MS office, so telling them not to use it is pointless. Worse, it's XP which means they're creating documents that won't work with half the shop using 97...They won't learn the free stuff, but won't live without some silly new MS "feature"
The problem is that you purposefully have to make a vendetta against the MS stuff to stop it from spreading and costing you more! It makes everyone upset and basicly makes you an ass, but what else can you do?
There needs to be an OpenOffice.org training site or something. I have some ideas, but I myself don't know OO.org well enough to use it fully.
It's really too bad that he doesn't have a lot of money to sue these people into the ground. If he was a corp, he could sue both of them an win, but he's not.
They've already made the comments and issued the letters, so under german law, they need to retract or show some evidence of their claims due to the german business laws. All-in-all it's a neat end run around SCO's abuse of the american legal system.
Why would they pay the time to learn open source and be free if Billy will just give them a "hit" for free.
Why won't they change from their pirated ways? Because they expect Bill [or someone else, not just MS] to overlook that because they're NPO. So they should get special treatment. Learning to be free is too much work!
I like it! Many of our current issues from Coke to MS to Iraq are more related to My lawyer's machine calling your lawyer's machine [i.e. Toby/spidie] and the pandering reaction of the media than outright planned malace.
In my experience, most executive management is like Homer Simpson, they'll shout at the TV [or execuutive assistants] with outrageous comments that then get followed as Law. They're really nice guys, but are totally insulated from the effect that their actions have on everyone else. Kinda like a road-rage thing. You don't really mean what you shout out do you? At least if you think about it, you'd be embarased if that was quoted in good company....only with all our jobs, lives, health, etc...
So yes, it's worse than mal1ce...they were to self-centered, opinionated, and power-drunk to even to even realize that you existed to hurt in the first place!
No matter what RMS-preceived wrongs are going on in the open source world, changing licensing rules now is just stupid. Businesses don't deal in grey. They want black and white, especially if the idea is new. This has been a trend on news posts for the last nine months!
realize too, for every one of these articles [there's been 3-4 this year!] that 10 other companies are reading this and reconsidering whether to jump on board OSS or not. The single enemy left of OSS is itself!
This companies example is a model for how alot of other companies could do business...and now the community is biting them back for it. There has to be compromise, and these guys seem to have found it. How does deciding years later that they aren't "good enough" for GNU look to the rest of the business world? Is this how OSS treats it's friends?
Of sloppy, cheap marketing and rushed engineering instead of solid hardware design!
This is like winmodems. They are "cheaper" just to save a few dimes instead of being truly independant devices. They want to save a buck by making these wireless cards merely transmitters, and relying on the embedding company to "finish" the product. The integrators don't want to share, because they all use the same chips, so software is the only defining quality between their products! Unfortunately, this doesn't look like it will change any time soon. BillyG has every one addicted to cheap hardware instead of paying for quality.
How about abstract hardware?
Why can't some one make a wireless card that acts like the routers. That accepts normal 100Mbs cat5 and automagically makes it wireless? That would seem like the answer as then it would "just work" and the drivers would just be to set the security settings.