Let's say this is entirely true: that Microsoft enters a space and this forces third-parties to lower the prices of their competing software.
Does this naturally translate to a consumer benefit?
I don't think so.
One major problem, methinks, is that Microsoft has complete Brand Recognition. For some folks, having Microsoft on the box means instant compatibility with everything else that is Windows and, furthermore, instant compatibilty with THEIR computer. Sheesh! For some, Microsoft means "PC."
Microsoft's brand-name alone is enough to crush the third-parties.
Ultimately this leads to less choice in the marketplace.
Until consumers become so well-informed that the Microsoft name doesn't immediately translate into quality for them, I think it's irrelevent that, for example, Microsoft Antispyware causes Webroot to lower the price on Spysweeper. Microsoft still has a large advantage.
Re:Portrayed by the media?
on
Is IRC All Bad?
·
· Score: 4, Funny
By and large, the media has never heard of IRC.
No kidding. Mention this to someone who has been on the Internet a few times and they're liking to say:
Come on, everything about Starbucks is just a bit creepy, the way they took the laid back Seattle coffee-house, encapsulated it into hyper-efficient soulless corporate package, and watched (with tight-lipped smiles) as the world collapsed quivering at their feet.
Largely I agree with you. But here's the thing: I don't like the fact that many independent coffeehouses lack quality control and that the coffee you buy tomorrow may not be the same as the coffee you buy today.
Yes, I realize that I am, as you say, quivering at the feet of a corporation (we can quibble on soulless), but I like consistancy. Of course, many independently owned coffee shops do well at quality control, but I've not found any and, quite frankly, I don't have the time or care to look.
I'm a Starbucks geek. (Yes, I think there is such a beast.) I go there almost daily. I bring people in to try new products. I have a card. I even read Howard Schultz's book. So, I was pretty excited when my wife and I visited Seattle about three years ago. We saw the original site, of course. We even visited the huge headquarters building. (Does anyone else find that Starbucks figurehead peering over the building just a little creepy?)
For those of you who haven't read Schultz's book, Starbucks and Peet's are linked in their history. Many folks say that it was really Alfred Peet who introduced Schultz to the darker, Full City roast that Starbucks finally used for their coffees.
Well, having read the book about the history, I wanted to see Peet's, too. There weren't any in New Orleans, where I lived at the time.
I visited one near the city center and I was immediately struck by the similarity in decor and layout between Peets and Starbucks. I mentioned this to the attendant.
It's true! Icy glares do send a chill down your spine.
I came to understand later the local rivalry between the companies that harkens all the way back to when Peet left Starbucks. Somehow Schultz didn't mention this. I can't believe it!;-)
Largely, this beta is little more than a rebranded GIANT Antispyware, which was already pretty good to being with. (Yeah, it doesn't support 95/98/ME any longer, but GIANT's software was a little flaky there.)
(It would be interesting if one could go back in time, send the same software to the reviewer with the GIANT brand and see if the name, "Microsoft," somehow changed the review, but I digress.)
I am less concerned with Microsoft's changing the underlying structure of the product than I am with their ability to keep up with the threat. Malware demands that an anti product get updated very, very often, sometimes daily. Microsoft, to date, has never demonstrated that they can keep up with the threat. How are they going to go from releasing one to two security updates every couple of weeks to keeping up with a threat that can change hourly.
Sure, it'll piss us all off if Microsoft -- who presumably has more knowledge of and access to Windows' under-pinnings -- doesn't live up to this challenge, but the worst that will happen to it is this nice product they bought will quickly become irrelevant. And the community (or communisits, I'm not sure which) will, again, rise up to fill the vacuum.
They aren't using Windows Media Player to install spyware. They are using WMP to get users to click on a link that takes them to a webpage where, presumably, the user's browser is compromised.
Actually, just playing content is enough to open any page, which, as we all know, could contain malware that exploits a security hole.
This has been going on for... what? One year? Two? It's really very old news.
This may be as easy to fix as a firmware update or driver download, or it may leave you with a bunch of equiptment that is not compatable with anything else.
That's true.
One thing to keep in mind is that many public wifi spots have spent a lot of money just offering 'b' to customers. They're not going to 'g' very quickly, it seems. How much time are we really talking about before any of them offer 'n'?
Of course, this says nothing about private wifi spots. In any case, almost all cards, including "pre-'n'" are backwards compatible. So, yeah, you're spending money on something that you may ultimately wind up throwing away.
But what else is new? Are you still using that CGA monitor?
1. Outsource IT department to India. 2. Department computers siezed by Indian government containing US customer info. 3. Indian government now has full access to the detailed financial, demographic and medical information of US citizens.
Re:My ADD son told me this joke...
on
Life Interrupted
·
· Score: 1
I saw this on Boing Boing. I like this version a little better:
How many ADD kids does it take to change a light bulb?
LET'S RIDE BIKES!!!!!
Re:Its true.... I've experienced it.
on
Life Interrupted
·
· Score: 1
Now as a software engineer I try to work on only one thing at a time. If I try to do more than that then all of my efforts fall behind. If I can focus on one task though, it gets done and done right.
Sooooooo, did you stop anything to post this note?;-)
Just buying out the "Commodore" name won't allow them to sue abandonware sites. There *might* be something they can do to emulator authors, but that's doubtful.
If recent history is any indication, a company doesn't necessary have to have a valid, proven, legal argument to come out on top of a lawsuit.
Can't recall the name, but remember reading several years ago about a U.S. trucking firm that did real-time tracking of all its trucks, monitored their fuel consumption, speed, how long it took of load and offload, if they deviated from the designated route or schedule, etc. Apparently resulted in serious efficiencies and serious revenue, with little grousing from drivers.
You're right.
It was covered in Wired some years ago. IIRC, the article was primarily about Schneider National and the company's efforts to track those items you mentioned.
I don't recall the article being particularly upbeat, though. I remember that the writer rode with a particular driver from Schneider and this particular driver wasn't that pleased.
Mostly, I remember this because one passage drew a scene in which the Schneider trucker, in the middle of passing another truck, was suddenly out run by the other truck.
The trucker remarked that the other truckers wouldn't dare let a Schneider pass them up, referring to the governor that restricts the truck's speed.
I think of this passage every time _I_ pass a Schneider truck on the road.
However, to non-geeks (reminder: this covers 99+% of the US population), Bill Gates is a hero and a role model.
Oh, I disagree completely. I talk to enough "non-geeks," as you call them, to know that the general consensus is that Windows is a necessary evil and that Bill Gates _has_ manipulated the system to his advantage and his competitors (and sometimes customers) disadvantage. To be sure, they don't react angrily to this, one fist in the air and the other handing $1500 to a sales person at the Apple store. They see Gates and Microsoft mainly as unfortunate but typical of any large company. They feel about as empowered to do anything as they do about complaining about the high costs of anything.
Hint: It ain't by the quality of their products. It's by the quality of their PR and legal departments.
Certainly that's part of it, but, as a roving tech support person who talks to folks about new computer purchases, I can say that the MAIN reason that many folks stick with Windows is fear.
They are worried that they won't be able to open stuff they get from friends or work. They are worried they won't be able to buy a certain application or hardware device because their computer won't support it.
They know that there are MANY options. They know they don't need to, for instance, buy Office to exchange Word documents anymore. They know that even though one vendor may not make a printer that supports their computer, there are many others who do.
But they think about these things and get nervous. They think of the disappointment if Grandma can't open the baby videos. They think about the call from the boss about the font change after they just modified a Word document. They don't actually KNOW these things will occur, but they don't dare risk it.
You can call these folks "stupid" or "ignorant," but this is what they think, and they're making buying decisions based on it.
The challenge, it seems to me, will be to make sure these devices will communicate with the "dataserver" without ANY necessary user intervention.
That's key. For all the accolades about the ease of USB and Firewire, I still see people weekly who's "PC" can't connect to their iPod or digital camera right out of the box for one reason or another.
Every single device needs to be able to:
1. Initiate communications with the host server.
2. Install any necessary applications on the host server.
3. Do both without any need for a user to "install" anything. (Of course, there will be room those who like to tinker.)
In other words, when I buy ANY digital camera, it should be able to wirelessly hook up with the "dataserver," as you call it, download any necessary applications/drivers/etc. to increase functionality, install those items on the server and/or device if need be, dump the photos on the server and then, wirelessly, be able to call those photos up if I want.
And the user should not have to _do_ anything except to turn the damn thing on.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's say this is entirely true: that Microsoft enters a space and this forces third-parties to lower the prices of their competing software.
Does this naturally translate to a consumer benefit?
I don't think so.
One major problem, methinks, is that Microsoft has complete Brand Recognition. For some folks, having Microsoft on the box means instant compatibility with everything else that is Windows and, furthermore, instant compatibilty with THEIR computer. Sheesh! For some, Microsoft means "PC."
Microsoft's brand-name alone is enough to crush the third-parties.
Ultimately this leads to less choice in the marketplace.
Until consumers become so well-informed that the Microsoft name doesn't immediately translate into quality for them, I think it's irrelevent that, for example, Microsoft Antispyware causes Webroot to lower the price on Spysweeper. Microsoft still has a large advantage.
By and large, the media has never heard of IRC.
No kidding. Mention this to someone who has been on the Internet a few times and they're liking to say:
"I recall correctly?"
Everytime I think I've figured them out, those Klingons surprise yet again. Who knew they worked on Keyboards AND Linux. Magnificent bastards!
There are here in Boston, too, especially on Newbury St.
I just don't get out there often. It's a failing on my part, I know.
I wonder if you like to consistently misspell that word too.
Yes, pretty offen.
Come on, everything about Starbucks is just a bit creepy, the way they took the laid back Seattle coffee-house, encapsulated it into hyper-efficient soulless corporate package, and watched (with tight-lipped smiles) as the world collapsed quivering at their feet.
Largely I agree with you. But here's the thing: I don't like the fact that many independent coffeehouses lack quality control and that the coffee you buy tomorrow may not be the same as the coffee you buy today.
Yes, I realize that I am, as you say, quivering at the feet of a corporation (we can quibble on soulless), but I like consistancy. Of course, many independently owned coffee shops do well at quality control, but I've not found any and, quite frankly, I don't have the time or care to look.
I'm a Starbucks geek. (Yes, I think there is such a beast.) I go there almost daily. I bring people in to try new products. I have a card. I even read Howard Schultz's book. So, I was pretty excited when my wife and I visited Seattle about three years ago. We saw the original site, of course. We even visited the huge headquarters building. (Does anyone else find that Starbucks figurehead peering over the building just a little creepy?)
;-)
For those of you who haven't read Schultz's book, Starbucks and Peet's are linked in their history. Many folks say that it was really Alfred Peet who introduced Schultz to the darker, Full City roast that Starbucks finally used for their coffees.
Well, having read the book about the history, I wanted to see Peet's, too. There weren't any in New Orleans, where I lived at the time.
I visited one near the city center and I was immediately struck by the similarity in decor and layout between Peets and Starbucks. I mentioned this to the attendant.
It's true! Icy glares do send a chill down your spine.
I came to understand later the local rivalry between the companies that harkens all the way back to when Peet left Starbucks. Somehow Schultz didn't mention this. I can't believe it!
Largely, this beta is little more than a rebranded GIANT Antispyware, which was already pretty good to being with. (Yeah, it doesn't support 95/98/ME any longer, but GIANT's software was a little flaky there.)
(It would be interesting if one could go back in time, send the same software to the reviewer with the GIANT brand and see if the name, "Microsoft," somehow changed the review, but I digress.)
I am less concerned with Microsoft's changing the underlying structure of the product than I am with their ability to keep up with the threat. Malware demands that an anti product get updated very, very often, sometimes daily. Microsoft, to date, has never demonstrated that they can keep up with the threat. How are they going to go from releasing one to two security updates every couple of weeks to keeping up with a threat that can change hourly.
Sure, it'll piss us all off if Microsoft -- who presumably has more knowledge of and access to Windows' under-pinnings -- doesn't live up to this challenge, but the worst that will happen to it is this nice product they bought will quickly become irrelevant. And the community (or communisits, I'm not sure which) will, again, rise up to fill the vacuum.
m
I really suspect that the ongoing money behind a lot of these companies are advertisers themselves. What about Dell UK on WhenU, for instance?
Bill Gates should play MCP. "MCP" sounds alarmingly like a Microsoft "Cert" doesn't it?
It is.
Microsoft Certified Professional.
End of Line.
They aren't using Windows Media Player to install spyware. They are using WMP to get users to click on a link that takes them to a webpage where, presumably, the user's browser is compromised.
... what? One year? Two? It's really very old news.
;-)
Actually, just playing content is enough to open any page, which, as we all know, could contain malware that exploits a security hole.
This has been going on for
It's made me give up porn. Sigh.
Same story as 6 month ago Zinc Whiskers Cripple Colorado's Computers.
Not really a dupe. More like another story about the same thing.
Anyway, I recall that there isn't a consensus on whether zinc whiskers exist. Some folks say it's a huge problem, others haven't seen them at all.
Cat whiskers, however, do exist. And they are a MENACE.
This may be as easy to fix as a firmware update or driver download, or it may leave you with a bunch of equiptment that is not compatable with anything else.
That's true.
One thing to keep in mind is that many public wifi spots have spent a lot of money just offering 'b' to customers. They're not going to 'g' very quickly, it seems. How much time are we really talking about before any of them offer 'n'?
Of course, this says nothing about private wifi spots. In any case, almost all cards, including "pre-'n'" are backwards compatible. So, yeah, you're spending money on something that you may ultimately wind up throwing away.
But what else is new? Are you still using that CGA monitor?
m
Wanna see a Robosapian program then ride a Big Trak into a big line of plastic, green army men?
It's such a nostaligic cornucopia!!
Just me, huh?
1. Outsource IT department to India.
:-/
2. Department computers siezed by Indian government containing US customer info.
3. Indian government now has full access to the detailed financial, demographic and medical information of US citizens.
I think you forgot...
4. Profit.
And, unfortunately, no, it's not a joke.
I thought that was Johnny Dangerously.
"C'mon shelfpaper..."
"You've got leprosy. Goodbye."
I saw this on Boing Boing. I like this version a little better:
How many ADD kids does it take to change a light bulb?
LET'S RIDE BIKES!!!!!
Now as a software engineer I try to work on only one thing at a time. If I try to do more than that then all of my efforts fall behind. If I can focus on one task though, it gets done and done right.
;-)
Sooooooo, did you stop anything to post this note?
Just buying out the "Commodore" name won't allow them to sue abandonware sites. There *might* be something they can do to emulator authors, but that's doubtful.
If recent history is any indication, a company doesn't necessary have to have a valid, proven, legal argument to come out on top of a lawsuit.
Can't recall the name, but remember reading several years ago about a U.S. trucking firm that did real-time tracking of all its trucks, monitored their fuel consumption, speed, how long it took of load and offload, if they deviated from the designated route or schedule, etc. Apparently resulted in serious efficiencies and serious revenue, with little grousing from drivers.
You're right.
It was covered in Wired some years ago. IIRC, the article was primarily about Schneider National and the company's efforts to track those items you mentioned.
I don't recall the article being particularly upbeat, though. I remember that the writer rode with a particular driver from Schneider and this particular driver wasn't that pleased.
Mostly, I remember this because one passage drew a scene in which the Schneider trucker, in the middle of passing another truck, was suddenly out run by the other truck.
The trucker remarked that the other truckers wouldn't dare let a Schneider pass them up, referring to the governor that restricts the truck's speed.
I think of this passage every time _I_ pass a Schneider truck on the road.
m
Reading this and remembering that age reminds me of why I've been in therapy all these years.
However, to non-geeks (reminder: this covers 99+% of the US population), Bill Gates is a hero and a role model.
Oh, I disagree completely. I talk to enough "non-geeks," as you call them, to know that the general consensus is that Windows is a necessary evil and that Bill Gates _has_ manipulated the system to his advantage and his competitors (and sometimes customers) disadvantage. To be sure, they don't react angrily to this, one fist in the air and the other handing $1500 to a sales person at the Apple store. They see Gates and Microsoft mainly as unfortunate but typical of any large company. They feel about as empowered to do anything as they do about complaining about the high costs of anything.
Hint: It ain't by the quality of their products. It's by the quality of their PR and legal departments.
Certainly that's part of it, but, as a roving tech support person who talks to folks about new computer purchases, I can say that the MAIN reason that many folks stick with Windows is fear.
They are worried that they won't be able to open stuff they get from friends or work. They are worried they won't be able to buy a certain application or hardware device because their computer won't support it.
They know that there are MANY options. They know they don't need to, for instance, buy Office to exchange Word documents anymore. They know that even though one vendor may not make a printer that supports their computer, there are many others who do.
But they think about these things and get nervous. They think of the disappointment if Grandma can't open the baby videos. They think about the call from the boss about the font change after they just modified a Word document. They don't actually KNOW these things will occur, but they don't dare risk it.
You can call these folks "stupid" or "ignorant," but this is what they think, and they're making buying decisions based on it.
The challenge, it seems to me, will be to make sure these devices will communicate with the "dataserver" without ANY necessary user intervention.
That's key. For all the accolades about the ease of USB and Firewire, I still see people weekly who's "PC" can't connect to their iPod or digital camera right out of the box for one reason or another.
Every single device needs to be able to:
1. Initiate communications with the host server.
2. Install any necessary applications on the host server.
3. Do both without any need for a user to "install" anything. (Of course, there will be room those who like to tinker.)
In other words, when I buy ANY digital camera, it should be able to wirelessly hook up with the "dataserver," as you call it, download any necessary applications/drivers/etc. to increase functionality, install those items on the server and/or device if need be, dump the photos on the server and then, wirelessly, be able to call those photos up if I want.
And the user should not have to _do_ anything except to turn the damn thing on.
That's my dream, anyway...