Well the developers didn't think it would lose them $5k of sales, or they wouldn't have entered into the contract.
MacHeist took the risk, by coughing up the cash on the assumption they could shift enough software to cover their fixed costs. They managed to, well done them, what's the problem?
What's the alternative, MacHeist pays out a load of money, doesn't recoup, never repeats the exercise?
and not only does everybody seem to be winning, a large number of people have been introduced to software and publishers they (seemingly) were previously unaware of.
This campaign has hugely raised the profile of all involved. If a similar scheme is launched again then the success of this one will ensure that the publisher at has the option of offering a higher flat-fee. If nothing else a large number of people have no paid for shareware software and this can only help the developers shift to them upgraded versions and other products in the future.
Yes I'm sure it's not very hard to 'read' what's stored on the Passport - but then it's never been very hard to visually look at it and read the paper - god knows how many photocopies there are of my passport in hotels and car-rentals across the planet.
The point of the RFID passport et al is to be able to verify it's genuine. You wave the passport at a border, it summons the electronic version and a check can be made that they match - i.e. verifies that somebody hasn't inserted an alternate photo etc.
If the RFID is just containing a serial number - then why not just use a barcode etc. If passport is broadcasting full details including photos, then the crack that's interesting is if somebody concocts their own passport - and then gets it recognized as a fully signed valid one.
Seeing as most passport fraud is just a genuine one, obtained by a similar looking (or even using the photo of the person going to use it), non-travelling person - then all these schemes are pointless. The weakest link is right at the start with the passport application process. The person who issues your passport hasn't got the slightest clue who you are - and as passports by their very definition are international, if you have trouble getting one in one country, you can just try from another.
Sorry - it's an involuntary reaction. If you want people to use OSS, then that's all very well and good. You've put blood sweat and mother-fucking tears into some code, you're proud of it and you want people to use it. Grand.
Continuously bashing the shit out of MS is not going to win anybody over. Linux is free. I mean FREE.
Do you think that maybe if you're giving something away for free and people still are choosing to pay for something else, then maybe it's you that has the problem, not the person managing to sell the software?
I've dabbled occasionally with Linux and yes it's very nice, but I always go crawling back to XP when I simply bit a wall of frustration with one stupid little problem I can't get around (the last one was trying to get Ubuntu to work with the Wifi in a T21).
In my humble opinon with Linux is that it's Linux. All these OSS fans will swear it'll all be better if you come over to their side - then once you're there you realize nobody can decide what the best productized version is - or in fact what the best way of doing anything is. The MS side is just simpler. I have XP. I get an XP driver. I install it, my wifi works. This simple process is the same for millions of people, they all do it the same way, ontop of the same OSS and it just 'works'. Same goes for OSS.
I think I've tried a few times over the years with RedHat, Suse and Ubuntu - but every time I hit problems, run out of time trying to fix them and go back.
Easiest switch is a corporate one. You switch XP out for Linux across hundreds of identical machines, make sure all the Apps/drivers work - and that's that. I just don't see how the humble and curious home-user is supposed to make the switch. You shove in the DVD you've downloaded and it probably gets most stuff working - but those things that didn't work.. Where next? Huge effort has been made in creating these LiveCDs/EasyInstall CDs but that's it. They just leave you hanging.
Have any OSS fans ever thought of setting up a free support system? You get your Linux CD, you install it, you have a problem, you go to a site and some nice Linux Guru can remote desktop across, chat to you, explain stuff etc? Once the knowledge spreads then that person can help out others, but currently there's just no bridge between those that write the code and those that try to use it.
Creating software is balancing the requirements that you want to provide against what the abilities of the machine it's going to be put on.
So new version of software expects it'll be installed on faster machine than the last one, so they can shove more features in.
So if I run new version and old version on the same machine, the new version will appear to be slower. Over time you'll PC will get faster and faster and the 'new' product will appear to get snappier and snappier - until the next new version of the software comes out and you'll complain it's slowed down again.
The point of PCs getting faster is now solely so you can run your old apps faster, it's to allow you to use new apps.
That's just validation of your OS - and the same with the OSX checks to make sure it's Apple hardware.
If I buy a copy of XP and install it. Then buy a copy of Office and install it. The two pieces of software aren't locked together. I can legally and easily take my copy of Office off one machine and put onto another one.
Evil DRM ridden future will be where my Office validates and locks against my copy of XP. Maybe the argument would be between windows and OSX versions of software. I can't just buy 'office' - I buy office for OSX or office for XP.
Somebody who has bought the product for XP and wants to switch to OSX (or vica versa) might be put off by having to re-buy the software they've already got just to allow it to run on a new platform (buch like rebuying the same tune to play it on Zune instead of their ipod).
who reads that and immediately concocts a plan to rig the system.
Take for example the restaurant example. I may not be too bothered which one of those two we go to, but if I do choose the most vile restaurant I can think of and make that my choice, then I'll still get to eat where the most yootles wanted to go, but I get given Yootles as well.
This works for a while, until more people twig and junk on the bandwaggon - eventually nobody'll come out with a net-yootle amount - and you'll all end up eating in the foul restaurant.
If you as a company want to introduce DRM to control distribution of your documents, then you are free to choose the system you want. You'll probably go with MS as you've already got Office installed on every desktop. You might regret your decision later on and wish to change, but it's not too hard - you have admin rights, you remove the protection and add protection from your new vendor.
Music DRM is different. You want to listen to a track from one of the big labels, you have to buy the music with DRM installed. If you later wish to swap to another vendor, then.... well you can buy all your music all over again - and kick yourself for not buying CDs.
DRM does benefit hardware makers - the one who got in there early and has most of the market. If you've bought an ipod over the last 5ish years and bought music, if you want to carry on listening to it, you're going to be be buying Apple iPods until the day you die.
So you've bought an ipod, so you had to buy m4p files, so you have to keep on buying ipods, so you keep on buying m4p files....
Only options you have to escape this cycle are to stop buying music, just buy CDs, Pirate your music or wait for the next DRM-removing util to come along and go cold turkey from DRM before it's patched.
DRM is Microsoft's problem - not their fault.
The fault rests solely with the music industry and their failure to recognize this media-less thing might catch one and their failure to create their own unified DRM standard from the start.
that if two people both lead the same 'good' life, one is a theist and one an atheist - the atheist is the better person.
One could argue that a believer does the right thing due to either the threat of a smiting, or a reward in heaven. An atheist doing the same act is performing a truly altruistic act, knowing he could either have got away with the alternative and will receive nothing in return.
1) Anybody who runs a website with a reasonable number of users gets shit-loads of this sortof email every day. You ignore it and just accept that the world is full of nuts and we've allowed them to send emails
2) This guy is quite clearly interested in fiddling with Google rankings - indulging him by linking and quoting his blog is really really not very helpful.
If you believe in democracy - then you can't elect the wrong one. People vote and get the government and representation they want.
You might then feel compelled to kill the lot of them for making that decision, but that was their democracy. If they'd been given their second choice - then things might work out better, but that isn't democracy.
A totalitarian state isn't necessarily bad. Tito's Yugoslavia really wasn't a bad place - but as soon as he died and democracy crept in, the whole place just fell apart.
The when Hamas officials churn out their desire for the obliteration of the Israeli state - even I with my lefty love of the underdog, feel that that's unacceptable.
My point is that something similar is happening in Iraq. The Iraqi people don't want a foreign force occupying their country.
Most of them aren't going to kill US/UK/etc soldiers, but they don't want them there. Given a free choice, they want them gone now and to take out the puppet/courrupt government they installed.
The current government will not survive if it is left as it is - hence while the people want the US gone, the government need to keep them and are frantically trying to build a security service for when the US goes.
Why would they need a security service? Because they're going to be damn unpopular with the people - and their just going to have to get 'quelling'.
Sooo Iraqi people now have a choice, they can keep current government and US funding - or elect whoever they choose and get their funding cut. If the funding goes, we end up with a civilized educated country, with a fucked infrastructure descending into a civil war.
Harsh truth is, that for Iraq to survive as a single country, the people need to be oppressed by their government - doesn't matter if it's Saddam or current government. If you want Iraq to survive as a single country, then a shit-load of innocent people are going to die..
Think about that again. When a Blu-Ray drive is sold, it makes money for Sony and a markup for whoever re-sold it.
In the same way Dell used to be Intel only, to get cheaper CPUs from Intel - Apple for example is saying it'll only bundle BluRay for now. The only reason these companies have stood up and limited their options is to get cheap Blu-Ray (and the same goes for the backers of HD-DVD).
If demand for one ramps up, or the price isn't cheap enough - these companies will switch overnight.
make a number of switches http://www.joytech.net/1/products/av/9/AV-Equipmen t.htm that do scart and component switching - there's even a specific 360 one if you click the link.
Really nice of kit that just do what they say on the tin. Bit that I like is that as well as SCART or composite switching, they'll switch a TOS link as well (TV might have many inputs, but decoders are sometimes a bit more limited).
Click one button on the little remote and you can flick between your consoles at will. If you get a decent remote, you can just stick the switch IR command into your Macro.
Oh and whilst I'm plugging it, the insulation on each channel is perfect (I have worked my way through a number of vile and cheap switchers).
a right tool for the job of "police work and occupying an angry populace"
Let us suppose for a moment it was reversed and the Iraqi army had invaded the US. You might have really hated Bush, you might have gone to protests against him, but I can't quite imagine US citizens welcoming in an invading force.
My best guess would be that the US hoped to get what they had in Iraq - puppet government to control their people, given the tools and blind-eye to do so by the US (in return for smoothly flowing oil).
The entire argument that the intention was merely to bring democracy is obvious jive. Take for example the recent elections in Palestine (which were considered to be free and fair) - the democratically elected government there was fair less corrupt than the PLO, but as the democratically elected view of the country moved away from desired US policy funded was halted (EU did the same). This was funding for hospitals etc and the lack of is is accepted as causing deaths of civilians.
You can only draw the conclusion that the stopping of funding was to punish the country for electing the 'wrong' democracy. While this punishment for voting the wrong way continues, I cannot see how any election result produced can be considered democratic.
but I had a bit of a revelation today.
I've always loved games. I used to be a poor child, then a poor student, then I was starting out in the world - and now finally I can afford pretty much whatever I want.
Gears of War. Looks great. Great reviews. It's £50.
I think we've passed my breaking point - I'm simply not going to pay that much for any game - I could, but that's £50 for a 'game' I'll probably just never finish
I don't care how much it cost to develop. I don't care how much gameplay I'll get out of it (actually I prefer shorter games as I don't have the time to play anything longer and my flat is littered with abandoned games and consoles as it is).
I don't even think it's so much the £50 - it's the entire industry desire to make everything bigger, longer and more expensive. I mean we all like pretty stuff, but pretty doesn't have to be expensive. I enjoyed spending an hour or so playing the first Sam and Max episode. I think Rez and Flow are wonderful. You don't need to hammer every last cycle out of the CPU and have offices full of artists to make a great looking game.
I think to summarize the entire industry has completely lost their way. Very few projects aim to offer what people want - more what the industry thinks they want (which is the last thing, but prettier with yet more bells and whistles).
DS should have been a wakeup call, but I'm not entirely sure everybody got it (Nintendo included). People want good, simple, fun games. DS isn't great because of the touch screen or the microphone, or the two screens (why why small ones is better than one large one is beyond me, apart from preventing mindless eye-candy) - it's THE GAMES. The Wii has come along as the saviour of the hardcore gamer, but that's just crap. Technically it's a Gamecube+ with a motion sensor - absolutely no reason why the motion sensor couldn't just have been a fun peripheral like an EyeToy, GH guitar etc. The Wii is purely a marketing tool to knock out a console with a high profit on it from the start. Doesn't mean there won't be any good games, but it's mere existence means nothing.
I'll trundle off to bed now, but I'm not happy.
the revenue brought into google by having his site indexed, was considerably lower than the cost of having a google employee investigating his problem and givin him a site-audit.
Weird, eh?
and tried a couple of similar package before. They're all snakeoil.
Nothing can replace years of professional practice and the ability to analyze the bumps on a perps skull.
Seemingly they launched extra magazine solely to occupy shelf-space, meaning if you randomly selected one it was unlikely to be published by their competition. Hence anybody trying to get a foothold in the market was crushed and Future owns the market.
We are not going to start debating the content of The Christian Science Monitor here.
If we don't nip this in the bud, then I fully expect to log on tomorrow to see:
"Is Vista truly the manifestation of Lucifer separating the masses for the rapture?"
"Which Linux distibution would Jesus roll with?"
"Does that papal blessing of his powerbook actually signify the transubstantiation of the Li-Ion cell to the mitochondrials of the holy spirit?"
would be to ensure the foundation doesn't carry on forever, supporting professional trustees and dribbling the interest out bit by bit.
There are many problems this money can solve now, as Gates seems to realize. Also, if you are embarking on a campaign to erradicate certain diseases, you only need to do it once. In face it's not that you only need to do it once, it's if you did try to do it a bit by bit, you'd never succeed.
Slashdot Mirror
Their crime was to take on upfront risk against a potentional profit - and succeeding.
Well the developers didn't think it would lose them $5k of sales, or they wouldn't have entered into the contract.
MacHeist took the risk, by coughing up the cash on the assumption they could shift enough software to cover their fixed costs. They managed to, well done them, what's the problem?
What's the alternative, MacHeist pays out a load of money, doesn't recoup, never repeats the exercise?
and not only does everybody seem to be winning, a large number of people have been introduced to software and publishers they (seemingly) were previously unaware of.
This campaign has hugely raised the profile of all involved. If a similar scheme is launched again then the success of this one will ensure that the publisher at has the option of offering a higher flat-fee. If nothing else a large number of people have no paid for shareware software and this can only help the developers shift to them upgraded versions and other products in the future.
Yes I'm sure it's not very hard to 'read' what's stored on the Passport - but then it's never been very hard to visually look at it and read the paper - god knows how many photocopies there are of my passport in hotels and car-rentals across the planet.
The point of the RFID passport et al is to be able to verify it's genuine. You wave the passport at a border, it summons the electronic version and a check can be made that they match - i.e. verifies that somebody hasn't inserted an alternate photo etc.
If the RFID is just containing a serial number - then why not just use a barcode etc. If passport is broadcasting full details including photos, then the crack that's interesting is if somebody concocts their own passport - and then gets it recognized as a fully signed valid one.
Seeing as most passport fraud is just a genuine one, obtained by a similar looking (or even using the photo of the person going to use it), non-travelling person - then all these schemes are pointless. The weakest link is right at the start with the passport application process. The person who issues your passport hasn't got the slightest clue who you are - and as passports by their very definition are international, if you have trouble getting one in one country, you can just try from another.
Sorry - it's an involuntary reaction. If you want people to use OSS, then that's all very well and good. You've put blood sweat and mother-fucking tears into some code, you're proud of it and you want people to use it. Grand.
Continuously bashing the shit out of MS is not going to win anybody over. Linux is free. I mean FREE.
Do you think that maybe if you're giving something away for free and people still are choosing to pay for something else, then maybe it's you that has the problem, not the person managing to sell the software?
I've dabbled occasionally with Linux and yes it's very nice, but I always go crawling back to XP when I simply bit a wall of frustration with one stupid little problem I can't get around (the last one was trying to get Ubuntu to work with the Wifi in a T21).
In my humble opinon with Linux is that it's Linux. All these OSS fans will swear it'll all be better if you come over to their side - then once you're there you realize nobody can decide what the best productized version is - or in fact what the best way of doing anything is. The MS side is just simpler. I have XP. I get an XP driver. I install it, my wifi works. This simple process is the same for millions of people, they all do it the same way, ontop of the same OSS and it just 'works'. Same goes for OSS.
I think I've tried a few times over the years with RedHat, Suse and Ubuntu - but every time I hit problems, run out of time trying to fix them and go back.
Easiest switch is a corporate one. You switch XP out for Linux across hundreds of identical machines, make sure all the Apps/drivers work - and that's that. I just don't see how the humble and curious home-user is supposed to make the switch. You shove in the DVD you've downloaded and it probably gets most stuff working - but those things that didn't work.. Where next? Huge effort has been made in creating these LiveCDs/EasyInstall CDs but that's it. They just leave you hanging.
Have any OSS fans ever thought of setting up a free support system? You get your Linux CD, you install it, you have a problem, you go to a site and some nice Linux Guru can remote desktop across, chat to you, explain stuff etc? Once the knowledge spreads then that person can help out others, but currently there's just no bridge between those that write the code and those that try to use it.
Creating software is balancing the requirements that you want to provide against what the abilities of the machine it's going to be put on.
So new version of software expects it'll be installed on faster machine than the last one, so they can shove more features in.
So if I run new version and old version on the same machine, the new version will appear to be slower. Over time you'll PC will get faster and faster and the 'new' product will appear to get snappier and snappier - until the next new version of the software comes out and you'll complain it's slowed down again.
The point of PCs getting faster is now solely so you can run your old apps faster, it's to allow you to use new apps.
That's just validation of your OS - and the same with the OSX checks to make sure it's Apple hardware.
If I buy a copy of XP and install it. Then buy a copy of Office and install it. The two pieces of software aren't locked together. I can legally and easily take my copy of Office off one machine and put onto another one.
Evil DRM ridden future will be where my Office validates and locks against my copy of XP. Maybe the argument would be between windows and OSX versions of software. I can't just buy 'office' - I buy office for OSX or office for XP.
Somebody who has bought the product for XP and wants to switch to OSX (or vica versa) might be put off by having to re-buy the software they've already got just to allow it to run on a new platform (buch like rebuying the same tune to play it on Zune instead of their ipod).
who reads that and immediately concocts a plan to rig the system.
Take for example the restaurant example. I may not be too bothered which one of those two we go to, but if I do choose the most vile restaurant I can think of and make that my choice, then I'll still get to eat where the most yootles wanted to go, but I get given Yootles as well.
This works for a while, until more people twig and junk on the bandwaggon - eventually nobody'll come out with a net-yootle amount - and you'll all end up eating in the foul restaurant.
If you as a company want to introduce DRM to control distribution of your documents, then you are free to choose the system you want. You'll probably go with MS as you've already got Office installed on every desktop. You might regret your decision later on and wish to change, but it's not too hard - you have admin rights, you remove the protection and add protection from your new vendor.
Music DRM is different. You want to listen to a track from one of the big labels, you have to buy the music with DRM installed. If you later wish to swap to another vendor, then.... well you can buy all your music all over again - and kick yourself for not buying CDs.
DRM does benefit hardware makers - the one who got in there early and has most of the market. If you've bought an ipod over the last 5ish years and bought music, if you want to carry on listening to it, you're going to be be buying Apple iPods until the day you die.
So you've bought an ipod, so you had to buy m4p files, so you have to keep on buying ipods, so you keep on buying m4p files....
Only options you have to escape this cycle are to stop buying music, just buy CDs, Pirate your music or wait for the next DRM-removing util to come along and go cold turkey from DRM before it's patched.
DRM is Microsoft's problem - not their fault. The fault rests solely with the music industry and their failure to recognize this media-less thing might catch one and their failure to create their own unified DRM standard from the start.
that if two people both lead the same 'good' life, one is a theist and one an atheist - the atheist is the better person.
One could argue that a believer does the right thing due to either the threat of a smiting, or a reward in heaven. An atheist doing the same act is performing a truly altruistic act, knowing he could either have got away with the alternative and will receive nothing in return.
1) Anybody who runs a website with a reasonable number of users gets shit-loads of this sortof email every day. You ignore it and just accept that the world is full of nuts and we've allowed them to send emails
2) This guy is quite clearly interested in fiddling with Google rankings - indulging him by linking and quoting his blog is really really not very helpful.
If you re-write Linux in XNA...
If you believe in democracy - then you can't elect the wrong one. People vote and get the government and representation they want.
You might then feel compelled to kill the lot of them for making that decision, but that was their democracy. If they'd been given their second choice - then things might work out better, but that isn't democracy.
A totalitarian state isn't necessarily bad. Tito's Yugoslavia really wasn't a bad place - but as soon as he died and democracy crept in, the whole place just fell apart.
The when Hamas officials churn out their desire for the obliteration of the Israeli state - even I with my lefty love of the underdog, feel that that's unacceptable.
My point is that something similar is happening in Iraq. The Iraqi people don't want a foreign force occupying their country.
Most of them aren't going to kill US/UK/etc soldiers, but they don't want them there. Given a free choice, they want them gone now and to take out the puppet/courrupt government they installed.
The current government will not survive if it is left as it is - hence while the people want the US gone, the government need to keep them and are frantically trying to build a security service for when the US goes.
Why would they need a security service? Because they're going to be damn unpopular with the people - and their just going to have to get 'quelling'.
Sooo Iraqi people now have a choice, they can keep current government and US funding - or elect whoever they choose and get their funding cut. If the funding goes, we end up with a civilized educated country, with a fucked infrastructure descending into a civil war.
Harsh truth is, that for Iraq to survive as a single country, the people need to be oppressed by their government - doesn't matter if it's Saddam or current government. If you want Iraq to survive as a single country, then a shit-load of innocent people are going to die..
Think about that again. When a Blu-Ray drive is sold, it makes money for Sony and a markup for whoever re-sold it.
In the same way Dell used to be Intel only, to get cheaper CPUs from Intel - Apple for example is saying it'll only bundle BluRay for now. The only reason these companies have stood up and limited their options is to get cheap Blu-Ray (and the same goes for the backers of HD-DVD).
If demand for one ramps up, or the price isn't cheap enough - these companies will switch overnight.
make a number of switches http://www.joytech.net/1/products/av/9/AV-Equipmen t.htm that do scart and component switching - there's even a specific 360 one if you click the link.
Really nice of kit that just do what they say on the tin. Bit that I like is that as well as SCART or composite switching, they'll switch a TOS link as well (TV might have many inputs, but decoders are sometimes a bit more limited).
Click one button on the little remote and you can flick between your consoles at will. If you get a decent remote, you can just stick the switch IR command into your Macro.
Oh and whilst I'm plugging it, the insulation on each channel is perfect (I have worked my way through a number of vile and cheap switchers).
a right tool for the job of "police work and occupying an angry populace"
Let us suppose for a moment it was reversed and the Iraqi army had invaded the US. You might have really hated Bush, you might have gone to protests against him, but I can't quite imagine US citizens welcoming in an invading force.
My best guess would be that the US hoped to get what they had in Iraq - puppet government to control their people, given the tools and blind-eye to do so by the US (in return for smoothly flowing oil).
The entire argument that the intention was merely to bring democracy is obvious jive. Take for example the recent elections in Palestine (which were considered to be free and fair) - the democratically elected government there was fair less corrupt than the PLO, but as the democratically elected view of the country moved away from desired US policy funded was halted (EU did the same). This was funding for hospitals etc and the lack of is is accepted as causing deaths of civilians.
You can only draw the conclusion that the stopping of funding was to punish the country for electing the 'wrong' democracy. While this punishment for voting the wrong way continues, I cannot see how any election result produced can be considered democratic.
but I had a bit of a revelation today.
I've always loved games. I used to be a poor child, then a poor student, then I was starting out in the world - and now finally I can afford pretty much whatever I want.
Gears of War. Looks great. Great reviews. It's £50.
I think we've passed my breaking point - I'm simply not going to pay that much for any game - I could, but that's £50 for a 'game' I'll probably just never finish
I don't care how much it cost to develop. I don't care how much gameplay I'll get out of it (actually I prefer shorter games as I don't have the time to play anything longer and my flat is littered with abandoned games and consoles as it is).
I don't even think it's so much the £50 - it's the entire industry desire to make everything bigger, longer and more expensive. I mean we all like pretty stuff, but pretty doesn't have to be expensive. I enjoyed spending an hour or so playing the first Sam and Max episode. I think Rez and Flow are wonderful. You don't need to hammer every last cycle out of the CPU and have offices full of artists to make a great looking game.
I think to summarize the entire industry has completely lost their way. Very few projects aim to offer what people want - more what the industry thinks they want (which is the last thing, but prettier with yet more bells and whistles).
DS should have been a wakeup call, but I'm not entirely sure everybody got it (Nintendo included). People want good, simple, fun games. DS isn't great because of the touch screen or the microphone, or the two screens (why why small ones is better than one large one is beyond me, apart from preventing mindless eye-candy) - it's THE GAMES. The Wii has come along as the saviour of the hardcore gamer, but that's just crap. Technically it's a Gamecube+ with a motion sensor - absolutely no reason why the motion sensor couldn't just have been a fun peripheral like an EyeToy, GH guitar etc. The Wii is purely a marketing tool to knock out a console with a high profit on it from the start. Doesn't mean there won't be any good games, but it's mere existence means nothing.
I'll trundle off to bed now, but I'm not happy.
the revenue brought into google by having his site indexed, was considerably lower than the cost of having a google employee investigating his problem and givin him a site-audit.
Weird, eh?
and tried a couple of similar package before. They're all snakeoil.
Nothing can replace years of professional practice and the ability to analyze the bumps on a perps skull.
Seemingly they launched extra magazine solely to occupy shelf-space, meaning if you randomly selected one it was unlikely to be published by their competition. Hence anybody trying to get a foothold in the market was crushed and Future owns the market.
We are not going to start debating the content of The Christian Science Monitor here.
If we don't nip this in the bud, then I fully expect to log on tomorrow to see:
"Is Vista truly the manifestation of Lucifer separating the masses for the rapture?"
"Which Linux distibution would Jesus roll with?"
"Does that papal blessing of his powerbook actually signify the transubstantiation of the Li-Ion cell to the mitochondrials of the holy spirit?"
Seemingly this is the first anti-MS story, that even Slashdot has collectively called as Troll.
would be to ensure the foundation doesn't carry on forever, supporting professional trustees and dribbling the interest out bit by bit.
There are many problems this money can solve now, as Gates seems to realize. Also, if you are embarking on a campaign to erradicate certain diseases, you only need to do it once. In face it's not that you only need to do it once, it's if you did try to do it a bit by bit, you'd never succeed.