Linux might be technically superior to Windows, but what we're really talking about here is market perception. The market still perceives MS as the status quo and "The real thing". In the context of TFA, people will shift from MS when there's a compelling incentive to do so and the percentage of price is the compelling first motivator. As TFA says, few perople are motivated to shift from MS when it makes up 10% of the ticket price. They're far more inclined to do so when it makes up 50% of the ticket price.
This percentage factor is well understood in retail industry. If you go into a shop with the the idea of buying a computer (big ticket item) you're already programmed yourself to spend a large amount. That's why the sales droid will put in a lot of effort to sell you extras (printers etc) when you buy a big ticket item. It is far easier to get someone to spend a few hundred extra on a new printer and other peripherals etc when they're spending up large than trying to do the same when they're just buying a new mouse or a pack of CDs.
Sure you can't predict random screening, but still the residual number of operatives will get through. If you're screening half the people (randomly) then:
If you send one operative you have a 50% chance of one getting through.
Send two and you have a 75% chance of at least one getting through.
Send ten and you have a 99.9% chance of at least one getting through.
The handy thing about many organisations is that they are willing to play the numbers.
Sure, the GPL uses copyright as an instrument and copyright law is pretty well tested, but that is not all there is to GPL. If it was then there would be no GPL.
What remains untested is the interpretation of the GPL and there are large parts of the GPL which are open to different interpretation.
For instance, the definition of "derived work" is pretty key to understanding the the GPL and the definition of that phrase is from being a done deal. The FSF has an faq that give Stallman's definitions and interpretations but these are not binding on the GPL.
Investors carefully assess their investments and expect a reasonable rate of return.
People who bought SCO during the Darl Days knew it was a long shot at getting a hefty slice of IBM. At best they were speculators. At worst they were greedy vultures. Nothing worth feeling sorry for.
Exactly how does cybercrime cost almost $20 for every man, woman and child on the planet? There must be some creative accounting going on here.
If the RIAA are involved in creating the stats, then they're probably using their $750 per track damages. If MS does the same thing for pirated versions of Office (probably $10000 per copy) etc, then just the piracy part of cybercrime would add up pretty quickly.
Bottom line: This sounds like a number that has been created to support some proposed course of action.
It only costs 10c to make a CD that MS sells for hundreds!
Like parent says, when you buy any electronic gizzmo you're not just paying for the parts. You're paying R&D costs, distribution costs, profit for share holders and the stores etc.
It is quite common for electronic products to sell for apperox 5x the cost of the raw components.
... I'm just putting the files where I can access them for my own listening enjoyment while I'm on the road/at work/in Starbucks. That's just fair use since I bought the rights to listen. I don't intend for anyone else to be listening, but I guess they could if they wanted to.
Sure the levees broke, but why the hell were people living below sea level?
The real problem is that city/state legislators kept on adding new housing etc in areas that were below sea level. The motivation to do this is purely financial: driven by tax takes etc.
This comitment to analog technology is just as much a problem for cell phones as for TV. This desire to keep the old stuff going is what keeps USA in the cellphone middle ages.
The only way to really get up to date is to have the balls to dump the past.
Companies work for themselves, not for the benefit of the economy at large. Look at all the negative effort that MS puts into body-slamming competition. How can that really be good for the economy as a whole? Sure, if they just competed by making better products that would be a Good Thing.
Even within many companies, different business units will compete for the same cusomers and make competing products (wasting company resources in duplicated efforts). Rather than try improve the whole company's position, business unit managers will crush eachother to get ahead.
Basically it is the old story: you get what you reward. Competitors get rewarded (directly or via Wall St) by beating eachother up, not by their contribution to the economy at large.
Sure changing policy won't change behavior. That is not the point.
What is important is to be able to show that the company had a good policy so that they have a legal safety net when they get sued. With a good policy in place you can blame the bad employee. Without one, the companyt has to take the heat for not setting up good policies.
Many of the best technical people at Sun have already left. The same happened to SCO too. Is Sun another SCO in the making (a once-good company that just runs out of steam and decomposes) or can they turn it around?
Sun has no brand presence amongst the Windows faithful so it is very difficult to see them making an effective box business.
to make a working lab prototype with limited functionality. It will take a lot longer to drive out cost and increase reliability sufficiently for this to be used in mass consumer applications.
Update of electronic devices typically takes quite a while. NAND flash was invented in the 1980s yet only really caught on in approx 2002.
Slashdot Mirror
This percentage factor is well understood in retail industry. If you go into a shop with the the idea of buying a computer (big ticket item) you're already programmed yourself to spend a large amount. That's why the sales droid will put in a lot of effort to sell you extras (printers etc) when you buy a big ticket item. It is far easier to get someone to spend a few hundred extra on a new printer and other peripherals etc when they're spending up large than trying to do the same when they're just buying a new mouse or a pack of CDs.
If you send one operative you have a 50% chance of one getting through.
Send two and you have a 75% chance of at least one getting through.
Send ten and you have a 99.9% chance of at least one getting through.
The handy thing about many organisations is that they are willing to play the numbers.
What remains untested is the interpretation of the GPL and there are large parts of the GPL which are open to different interpretation.
For instance, the definition of "derived work" is pretty key to understanding the the GPL and the definition of that phrase is from being a done deal. The FSF has an faq that give Stallman's definitions and interpretations but these are not binding on the GPL.
People who bought SCO during the Darl Days knew it was a long shot at getting a hefty slice of IBM. At best they were speculators. At worst they were greedy vultures. Nothing worth feeling sorry for.
YRO? Where's the online angle in this?
A survey run at the same time in a sex shop showed that most Americans have not time for the internet because they're having sex.
If it really does only penentrate the top 1/64th then wet or oily cloathing should stop it.
If the RIAA are involved in creating the stats, then they're probably using their $750 per track damages. If MS does the same thing for pirated versions of Office (probably $10000 per copy) etc, then just the piracy part of cybercrime would add up pretty quickly.
Bottom line: This sounds like a number that has been created to support some proposed course of action.
Like parent says, when you buy any electronic gizzmo you're not just paying for the parts. You're paying R&D costs, distribution costs, profit for share holders and the stores etc.
It is quite common for electronic products to sell for apperox 5x the cost of the raw components.
Why would CPUs have to be in 2^n configurations?
Pretty much all organisms will spread to new areas under competition.
Wonder whether that defense would work?
new brain first.
The real problem is that city/state legislators kept on adding new housing etc in areas that were below sea level. The motivation to do this is purely financial: driven by tax takes etc.
A week or so ago we had probelms of sound playing disturbing network trafric. Inmagine the extra overheads of processing adware.,
The only way to really get up to date is to have the balls to dump the past.
Even within many companies, different business units will compete for the same cusomers and make competing products (wasting company resources in duplicated efforts). Rather than try improve the whole company's position, business unit managers will crush eachother to get ahead.
Basically it is the old story: you get what you reward. Competitors get rewarded (directly or via Wall St) by beating eachother up, not by their contribution to the economy at large.
I am keen to try out this new technology. Will HP be releasing Vista drivers soon?
If things go bad with no policy in place, that's a company/management screw up and senior managers must take the heat.
If things go bad when there are sound policies in place they han put all the heat on individual employees.
What is important is to be able to show that the company had a good policy so that they have a legal safety net when they get sued. With a good policy in place you can blame the bad employee. Without one, the companyt has to take the heat for not setting up good policies.
Sun has no brand presence amongst the Windows faithful so it is very difficult to see them making an effective box business.
Update of electronic devices typically takes quite a while. NAND flash was invented in the 1980s yet only really caught on in approx 2002.
So far this breakthrough technology can already access 404 errors. With a bit more development we should be able to get pictures and documents too.
That cures constipation and produuces a lot of oil.