That's what I said...apparently you read the grandparent post and replied to mine. The GP said that OS and Office were licensed for multiple installs...I corrected him with the fact that the OS is NOT, but Office IS licensed for more than one simultaneous install.
From Windows XP Professional, retail upgrade: "You may install, use, access, display and run one copy of the Product on a single computer, such as a workstation, terminal or other device ("Workstation Computer")."
From Office 2003 Professional, Academic: "install an additional copy of the Software on a second, portable device for the exclusive use of the primary user of the first copy of the Software."
For those that get confused:
Windows 2000/XP{Home,Pro}: 1 install Office 97/2000/XP/2003: 1 desktop, plus portable machine used by SAME primary user
Microsoft's OS's have never been licensed for 2 installs - but all copies of Office do. (The employee take-home copies of Office do NOT include this clause, other volume-type versions may as well)
...until this story's been duped at LEAST 5 times, since it's just oh-so-important. If it weren't a big issue, it'd only be 3 times. So after the 3rd posting of this, then we'll see that he's been convicted, then another 2 or so dupes of the fact that he's "under investigation."
I think I'll be writing a letter thanking him...I'm trying to think if he's done anything I should reprimand him for though, I haven't been paying much attention.
I currently work for IBM (Global Services). When I signed the paperwork, there was a blank field area for me to write it any exceptions to the "anything you do while working for us is owned by us" clause.
I put in the stuff I'm working on on my own.
A previous possible job, I sold some old computers to my father's work for use as build machines. They then didn't want to tie up their expensive engineers to set them up - 1- they cost alot per hour. 2- they didn't quite know what they were doing. So I was going to be brought in (as the tech who'd worked on them at their previous location)
Manpower is *THE* contracting firm for said company. Manpower had the IP clause in there, without a "here's the exceptions." I asked if we could strike that clause, since I wasn'tbeing brought in to do any development, and would only be there a week or two. The Manpower rep said I'd have to get in touch with their legal department.
"On October 19, 2004, Microsoft announced that its server software that is currently licensed on a per-processor model will continue to be licensed on a per-processor, and not on a per-core, model."
"On October 19, 2004, Microsoft announced that its server software that is currently licensed on a per-processor model will continue to be licensed on a per-processor, and not on a per-core, model."
I've been mirroring said project since basically day 1, but now that mozdev is mirroring it, well, they don't list the other mirrors, but I still maintain mine:D
Quite the handy project, I don't use it myself (my flash drive contains most of my stuff, more obscure than the ones included)
But it is useful for those who do lots of installs for new users.
I don't agree with the PATRIOT Act either, and the US Congress has recently been deliberating on what can and can't be done with them, including banning torture. Bush's warmongering is starting to draw attention, and people are finally seriously questioning him to the point of taking away the powers given to him. I feel it is long overdue.
At least the enemy combatants in Guantanamo are known about here, and that Congress is (finally) doing something about it. China isn't, they send more than we have in Guantanamo to their prisons every year - for "political" crimes against the government.
The US took a swing for the worse, but we are starting to correct for it. China has not.
...the UN should have abolished all human rights abuses in the world, prevented wars, etc. Or at least gotten them under control once identified. Yet they continue to happen, often in the lands of their own members.
As long as countries like China, Cuba, Iran and the like continue to censor their citizens to the levels that they do (For example, MSN China won't let you search for or post blogs on the subjects "freedom", "democracy" and "demonstration") giving the UN control will be a inherently "Bad Thing." The UN, for all it's freedom-loving and community feeling, doesn't have anything in it's declarations of human rights about the right to free speech. Here in the US, I at least have the law stating that I do. Now, in some cases, it has been restricted, but these are being fought, and some of the battles are even being won, with ground gained and lost as in all battles.
Here in America, I was able to write an article criticizing Microsoft for their stance on Office, with regards to OpenDocument support. Would I be able to criticize the largest software company in China, for example? I doubt I would have the right (or the expectation to not suffer the repurcussions of angering one of the largest companies) merely for speaking out.
I can stand up and voice an opinion that goes against "the party line." (valid in more than just Communist China) If I were to do this in China, or any of the other listed countries, I would face prison, at the least, if not death.
I'm sorry, I'll stick with the US being in control. What's broke about it? What has the US done wrong with regards to controlling the internet? Up until now we've let ICANN run things how they want...the "hands-off" approach has worked well. We would be among the first to complain should the US administration start exerting control, as that would be censorship, and against our Constitution. The UN does not recogonize the right of free speech as a right member countries citizens have.
...from what I hear from my father, who is a software engineer currently working on the A380's nav box (also backwards compatible with current planes, the "old interface")
This type of stuff undergoes so much testing - a single change can mean millions more in testing and development costs, not even taking into account the months or years spent.
As my father's one of the lead software engineers designing those, and they're quad-redundant within each box, and I think he mentioned something about 2 or 3 in this specific one. Might be wrong, it's been awhile since I've talked to him about it though.
I hit that issue, for my site (linked in my profile) Bachman New Age Computing. BNAC for short..com,.net,.org were all taken. So I started looking at the unique, other TLDs. Biz fit. So I registered it.
Sec. 17. LAWS TO EMBRACE ONLY ONE SUBJECT. No law shall embrace more than one subject, which shall be expressed in its title.
In fact, we all were reminded here in Minnesota of this constitutional article not too long ago, when the courts struck down our concealed-carry law, not because the law itself was illegal, but because it came attached to a DNR-related bill. (that was unrelated to guns, arms and the like)
Actually, the holodeck was a combination of light tricks and tractor beams, AND replicators - physical items would actually be replicated, whereas "living" things weren't quite so "physical" IIRC.
This hit last Friday, and as the FP mentioned they fixed it with the rolling server restarts. Not knowing if this was permanant or not, I walked my level 6 Priest up to Ironforge (Dwarf) and promptly got infected - died from the first blast of damage as I didn't have as many health points as it inflicted.
Lasted until death, upon resurrection you'd have to be reinfected to suffer from it again. Enabling PVP mode seems to be the known fix (in case it escapes again) which can be done by doing "/pvp" in-game.
I didn't notice it at all on Saturday after the rolling restarts, seems to have fixed it. We'll see.
On another note, Websense now seems to block WorldofWarcraft.com, so I can't read the forum post about the plague spreading again, at least here at work.
Because when you send a packet of data (in this case, a chunk of a BT file) the other machine sends a response saying that it recieved it. When you don't cap your upload, and you have a limited upload (like residential DSL/Cable connections) it sends as fast as it can, and at this point there's no outgoing bandwidth for you to send a response on the incoming data.
So this isn't a problem (usually) on BT's side - it's the user not understanding and allowing for this. I figure it out by testing the bandwidth - find a torrent that I'm seeding, don't set an upload limit, and watch it. Then I back it off 5-15k depending on wether I'm going to be doing any other surfing or not, or if there are other users/computers making use of that connection. Bandwidth tests will also work.
The contract I'm currently on (working for IBM Global Services) is a "WT" (Workstation Transformation - glorified software refresh, with some old hardware being removed from use and deploying new replacment machines - leased, of course)
The client is only NOW going from Windows 2000 to Windows XP. I'll bet they won't upgrade again til at least 2008, at minimum. This upgrade has been going on since at *least* January, and that's just the actual implementation.
Vista is going to have a HELL of a time breaking into the business world.
Slashdot Mirror
That's what I said...apparently you read the grandparent post and replied to mine. The GP said that OS and Office were licensed for multiple installs...I corrected him with the fact that the OS is NOT, but Office IS licensed for more than one simultaneous install.
From Windows XP Professional, retail upgrade: "You may install, use, access, display and run one copy of the Product on a single computer, such as a workstation, terminal or other device ("Workstation Computer")."
From Office 2003 Professional, Academic: "install an additional copy of the Software on a second, portable device for the exclusive use of the primary user of the first copy of the Software."
For those that get confused:
Windows 2000/XP{Home,Pro}: 1 install
Office 97/2000/XP/2003: 1 desktop, plus portable machine used by SAME primary user
Microsoft's OS's have never been licensed for 2 installs - but all copies of Office do. (The employee take-home copies of Office do NOT include this clause, other volume-type versions may as well)
I just put this one up.
http://www.bnac.biz/downloads/openoffice.org/
Don't hurt me, I recommend the torrent if you're capable. Mirrored primarily for those on dialup, or with P2P blocked.
...until this story's been duped at LEAST 5 times, since it's just oh-so-important. If it weren't a big issue, it'd only be 3 times. So after the 3rd posting of this, then we'll see that he's been convicted, then another 2 or so dupes of the fact that he's "under investigation."
/., how I enjoy thee.
Ahhh...
I think I'll be writing a letter thanking him...I'm trying to think if he's done anything I should reprimand him for though, I haven't been paying much attention.
Why not?
Damnit, now you make me want to make one that says that and go to the State Fair next year, just to see the response...
I currently work for IBM (Global Services). When I signed the paperwork, there was a blank field area for me to write it any exceptions to the "anything you do while working for us is owned by us" clause.
I put in the stuff I'm working on on my own.
A previous possible job, I sold some old computers to my father's work for use as build machines. They then didn't want to tie up their expensive engineers to set them up - 1- they cost alot per hour. 2- they didn't quite know what they were doing. So I was going to be brought in (as the tech who'd worked on them at their previous location)
Manpower is *THE* contracting firm for said company. Manpower had the IP clause in there, without a "here's the exceptions." I asked if we could strike that clause, since I wasn'tbeing brought in to do any development, and would only be there a week or two. The Manpower rep said I'd have to get in touch with their legal department.
I said I wasn't interested.
I've had the chance to play with a dual-core HT'd desktop processor from Intel. It has XP Pro on it, and runs fine, showing 4 processors.
t icore.mspx
As I responded to the grandparent:
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/highlights/mul
"On October 19, 2004, Microsoft announced that its server software that is currently licensed on a per-processor model will continue to be licensed on a per-processor, and not on a per-core, model."
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/highlights/mult icore.mspx
"On October 19, 2004, Microsoft announced that its server software that is currently licensed on a per-processor model will continue to be licensed on a per-processor, and not on a per-core, model."
I've been mirroring said project since basically day 1, but now that mozdev is mirroring it, well, they don't list the other mirrors, but I still maintain mine :D
Quite the handy project, I don't use it myself (my flash drive contains most of my stuff, more obscure than the ones included)
But it is useful for those who do lots of installs for new users.
I don't agree with the PATRIOT Act either, and the US Congress has recently been deliberating on what can and can't be done with them, including banning torture. Bush's warmongering is starting to draw attention, and people are finally seriously questioning him to the point of taking away the powers given to him. I feel it is long overdue.
At least the enemy combatants in Guantanamo are known about here, and that Congress is (finally) doing something about it. China isn't, they send more than we have in Guantanamo to their prisons every year - for "political" crimes against the government.
The US took a swing for the worse, but we are starting to correct for it. China has not.
...the UN should have abolished all human rights abuses in the world, prevented wars, etc. Or at least gotten them under control once identified. Yet they continue to happen, often in the lands of their own members.
...we wouldn't be having this discussion. At least not in public, if we had any hopes of living or remaining "free*."
*As free as one living in China, or under Chinese rule, actually is free.
Here in America, I was able to write an article criticizing Microsoft for their stance on Office, with regards to OpenDocument support. Would I be able to criticize the largest software company in China, for example? I doubt I would have the right (or the expectation to not suffer the repurcussions of angering one of the largest companies) merely for speaking out.
I can stand up and voice an opinion that goes against "the party line." (valid in more than just Communist China) If I were to do this in China, or any of the other listed countries, I would face prison, at the least, if not death.
I'm sorry, I'll stick with the US being in control. What's broke about it? What has the US done wrong with regards to controlling the internet? Up until now we've let ICANN run things how they want...the "hands-off" approach has worked well. We would be among the first to complain should the US administration start exerting control, as that would be censorship, and against our Constitution. The UN does not recogonize the right of free speech as a right member countries citizens have.
Perhaps they have an interal calender server, for Google employees?
Or, it's something that someday may do something that we can see...
...from what I hear from my father, who is a software engineer currently working on the A380's nav box (also backwards compatible with current planes, the "old interface")
This type of stuff undergoes so much testing - a single change can mean millions more in testing and development costs, not even taking into account the months or years spent.
As my father's one of the lead software engineers designing those, and they're quad-redundant within each box, and I think he mentioned something about 2 or 3 in this specific one. Might be wrong, it's been awhile since I've talked to him about it though.
I hit that issue, for my site (linked in my profile) Bachman New Age Computing. BNAC for short. .com, .net, .org were all taken. So I started looking at the unique, other TLDs. Biz fit. So I registered it.
Quite easy, bnac.biz. Easy to spell, and it fits.
I'm quite content with my non-"mainstream" TLD.
Minnesota Constitution, Article 4, Section 17:
A rticle4.htm
d =12598707 here)
http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/cco/rules/mncon/
Sec. 17. LAWS TO EMBRACE ONLY ONE SUBJECT. No law shall embrace more than one subject, which shall be expressed in its title.
In fact, we all were reminded here in Minnesota of this constitutional article not too long ago, when the courts struck down our concealed-carry law, not because the law itself was illegal, but because it came attached to a DNR-related bill. (that was unrelated to guns, arms and the like)
(Copy and pasted from my post on http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=150232&ci
Now we just need to get our national representatives to agree to such a provision. How about it, boys and girls?
Actually, the holodeck was a combination of light tricks and tractor beams, AND replicators - physical items would actually be replicated, whereas "living" things weren't quite so "physical" IIRC.
This hit last Friday, and as the FP mentioned they fixed it with the rolling server restarts. Not knowing if this was permanant or not, I walked my level 6 Priest up to Ironforge (Dwarf) and promptly got infected - died from the first blast of damage as I didn't have as many health points as it inflicted.
Lasted until death, upon resurrection you'd have to be reinfected to suffer from it again. Enabling PVP mode seems to be the known fix (in case it escapes again) which can be done by doing "/pvp" in-game.
I didn't notice it at all on Saturday after the rolling restarts, seems to have fixed it. We'll see.
On another note, Websense now seems to block WorldofWarcraft.com, so I can't read the forum post about the plague spreading again, at least here at work.
Because when you send a packet of data (in this case, a chunk of a BT file) the other machine sends a response saying that it recieved it. When you don't cap your upload, and you have a limited upload (like residential DSL/Cable connections) it sends as fast as it can, and at this point there's no outgoing bandwidth for you to send a response on the incoming data.
So this isn't a problem (usually) on BT's side - it's the user not understanding and allowing for this. I figure it out by testing the bandwidth - find a torrent that I'm seeding, don't set an upload limit, and watch it. Then I back it off 5-15k depending on wether I'm going to be doing any other surfing or not, or if there are other users/computers making use of that connection. Bandwidth tests will also work.
When I need to do something else, like hit keys elsewhere, the left hand IS FLEXIBLE. :D
With regards to XP being "good enough":
The contract I'm currently on (working for IBM Global Services) is a "WT" (Workstation Transformation - glorified software refresh, with some old hardware being removed from use and deploying new replacment machines - leased, of course)
The client is only NOW going from Windows 2000 to Windows XP. I'll bet they won't upgrade again til at least 2008, at minimum. This upgrade has been going on since at *least* January, and that's just the actual implementation.
Vista is going to have a HELL of a time breaking into the business world.
Right hand = mouse
Left hand = Ctrl A W D Space (roughly)
From this setup, I can do most anything in FF.