And being the free market the point of a company is to maximize shareholders profits and not too bring the next great artist to the spotlight.
They may maximize the short term profits but the long term effect can be very different. The most profitable periods for the music industry followed periods where they developed new talent. Look at the late 60's - early 70's for example.
The industry thinks file sharing is the cause of their downfall. Actually they have 2 enemies that are bigger than this:
1) ClearChannel and the other narrow-casters who limit what people hear on the radio.
2) Themselves- They do not develop the new talent. They could find low cost ways to do this if they did not have their heads up their butts. They are also suing their customer base. This one reason why I do not purchase CDs unless they clear RIAA Radar.
Yes, well, in the U.S. at least we'll probably have to wait until we can get in that new President and Congress we ordered. The current ones are malfunctioning and in need of replacement.
Do no hold your breath. The Democrats are now moving as fast as they can to be as corrupt as the Republicans. Dianne Feinstein is already 0wned by the movie and record industry.
...it is certainly possible to have secure network running mostly MS software. The fact that some people can't do it is just a sign that they are not competent enough to do their jobs.
But Microsoft sells itself as the software for dumb people who have no technical expertise. You have seen the adverts on TV with the ordinary schlebs in an office environment all happier than a pig in mud puddle. They are happy because they can use computers with Microsoft software even though they do not know jack.
Microsoft uses essentially the same sales pitch to the captains of industry who decide what goes into the corporate computing infrastructure. They tell them " Hey look -- you do not need the level of expertise found for our software that you need for say a Unix set up. "Ordinary people" [ read inexpensive people with just a moderate skill level ] can keep it working.
It should then not be a surprise that these "ordinary people" can not secure the computer network.
Of course one could argue that Apple released a terribly inefficient product at the start, making it easy to get better performance later on. That's good PR. Give them crap, and make it slightly less crappy each time out.
But this is far better than releasing a terribly inefficient product at the start and then making the performance worse with each iteration. But I am being unfair here. NT 4.0 was actually a pretty good O.S.. It was lightweight and had good performance. The follow on products were inefficient.
If this was just due to a control system oscillation, then this may have been easily avoided. There is a body of knowledge called control theory . It is about the analysis of feedback control loops. An engineer applies this to the desired control system performance and guarantee control loop stability.
This control theory stuff is abstract, somewhat difficult and time consuming to learn. But if you have feedback control in a mission critical application it is essential to bring this body of knowledge to bear on the problem. If this is done properly there should be no control loop oscillations unless there is a hardware failure.
Because control theory is abstract, it can be an uphill fight to argue for the application of this body of knowledge to people who do not understand it. This is especially true in an environment run by PhD physicist who think engineering is just a subset of physics. This rocket may have failed due to hubris.
guy, you need to defend your opinion with facts and reasonings, not questioning on author's credit or shut up the one who picked the author's opinion:)
I have no problem with a reasoned criticism from a reputable author.
I have no problem with a reasoned criticism from an unknown author with no reputation.
I do have a problem with a troll article by someone with a very disreputable author.
Life is to short to spend it arguing with fuckwits. I do not have time to argue with any of the following:
-Those who say smoking tobacco does not cause cancer.
-Holocaust deniers.
-"Creation Science" evolution deniers.
-Global Warming deniers.
-Rob Enderly
If we are at a stage where we need to spend a large amount of time arguing with these sorts of idiots, then our civilization is in serious decline!
I am posting from a System 76 "Pangolin" laptop. I really like it. It is based on an Asus whitebook notebook. This notebook is a "Common Building Block" CBB notebook. Many of the parts interchange with parts from other manufacturers. These include the battery, power supply, keyboard and screen.
Installing the Beryl window manager was painless too.
The hardware is rather generic with Intel Wireless and graphics. I am sure that just about any distribution will work.
It also has a mind-boggling 34% short ratio, and they haven't been able to run up a short squeeze yet because everyone going short believes the worst is yet to come. That's right, over a third of the stock is held by people with an interest in SCOX's failure.
The shorts do not own stock. They owe stock. They sold the stock before they bought the stock.
California Assemblyman Llyod Levine wants to make his state the first to ban incandescent lightbulbs with the "How Many Legislators Does it Take to Change a Lightbulb Act"
I would call it the "How Many Legislators Does it Take to screw his head up his ass act."
But Microsoft is responsible for how they advertise and promote the product. The are responsible for the veracity of the product description. If the feature is semi-broken for whatever reason, then they have an obligation to come clean about this. They also have an obligation to indicate which songs are "squirt" impaired before a customer makes the purchase.
Actually, if he signed something saying "all work done on company time and/or with company resources is owned by the company", he has effectively transferred the copyrights to the relevant code in advance
This Guy is a Cop not a software developer. Normal people in normal jobs do have to sign these assignment of future IP contracts.
I see linux as being solid, powerful and rugged. In this way it is like a dump trunk. Much of the Internet runs on Linux for these very reasons. I also see it as a bit like the old Volkswagen beetles. It is fairly easy to work on. It is easy to modify.
The technology for perpendicular recording has been around for years. This is just yet another way to increase areal data density on a hard drive disk. It has not shown up in production hard drives because there was lower hanging fruit ripe for picking when it came to increasing areal density.
From this article, I conclude the computer and electronic revolution has run it's course. We are not getting much innovation anymore. We are just getting incremental improvements on the innovations from years past.
But this is BAD NEWS because it's GOVERNMENT CONTROL which is EVIL because the FREE MARKET would produce the BEST RESULT for the CONSUMERS!
Industrialists love the "FREE MARKET". That is why they put so much effort in to avoiding and evading the free market. Locking customers into proprietary cables and chargers is just one example of free market avoidance.
Linux has lots of semi independent parts.
The kernal is only kernal. You can even not use the Linux kernal and use a BSD variant. Changes to the kernal usually do not break the start-stop process.
Then there is an inner layer to the GUI. Usually this is X.org. But you could use Xfree86 instead.
Then you can use Gnome or KDE or Enlightenment or BlackBox or...
The startup and stopping algorithms are in another module. It has been some sort of System V thing but some distros are switching to a newer system.
This modularity shows up throughout an opens source desktop OS.
The way these layers talk to each other is well defined so that development can proceed on these parts independently. This avoids the need for a convoluted source code repository system. The parts are small enough to be manageable.
Slashdot Mirror
AMD had revenue of $5.25B last year (An increase of 25%), note that this is revenue, not profit.
Intel's marketing budget for last year was $2.5B
But at Intel I am sure they spend $2.0B talking about procedures for doing and improving marketing with only about $0.5B going to actual marketing.
And being the free market the point of a company is to maximize shareholders profits and not too bring the next great artist to the spotlight.
They may maximize the short term profits but the long term effect can be very different. The most profitable periods for the music industry followed periods where they developed new talent. Look at the late 60's - early 70's for example.
The industry thinks file sharing is the cause of their downfall. Actually they have 2 enemies that are bigger than this:
1) ClearChannel and the other narrow-casters who limit what people hear on the radio.
2) Themselves- They do not develop the new talent. They could find low cost ways to do this if they did not have their heads up their butts. They are also suing their customer base. This one reason why I do not purchase CDs unless they clear RIAA Radar.
Yes, well, in the U.S. at least we'll probably have to wait until we can get in that new President and Congress we ordered. The current ones are malfunctioning and in need of replacement.
Do no hold your breath. The Democrats are now moving as fast as they can to be as corrupt as the Republicans. Dianne Feinstein is already 0wned by the movie and record industry.
But Microsoft sells itself as the software for dumb people who have no technical expertise. You have seen the adverts on TV with the ordinary schlebs in an office environment all happier than a pig in mud puddle. They are happy because they can use computers with Microsoft software even though they do not know jack.
Microsoft uses essentially the same sales pitch to the captains of industry who decide what goes into the corporate computing infrastructure. They tell them " Hey look -- you do not need the level of expertise found for our software that you need for say a Unix set up. "Ordinary people" [ read inexpensive people with just a moderate skill level ] can keep it working.
It should then not be a surprise that these "ordinary people" can not secure the computer network.
Of course one could argue that Apple released a terribly inefficient product at the start, making it easy to get better performance later on. That's good PR. Give them crap, and make it slightly less crappy each time out.
But this is far better than releasing a terribly inefficient product at the start and then making the performance worse with each iteration. But I am being unfair here. NT 4.0 was actually a pretty good O.S.. It was lightweight and had good performance. The follow on products were inefficient.
If this was just due to a control system oscillation, then this may have been easily avoided. There is a body of knowledge called control theory . It is about the analysis of feedback control loops. An engineer applies this to the desired control system performance and guarantee control loop stability.
This control theory stuff is abstract, somewhat difficult and time consuming to learn. But if you have feedback control in a mission critical application it is essential to bring this body of knowledge to bear on the problem. If this is done properly there should be no control loop oscillations unless there is a hardware failure.
Because control theory is abstract, it can be an uphill fight to argue for the application of this body of knowledge to people who do not understand it. This is especially true in an environment run by PhD physicist who think engineering is just a subset of physics. This rocket may have failed due to hubris.
The only thing holding up the stock price are all the shorts who need to buy in order to cover!
guy, you need to defend your opinion with facts and reasonings, not questioning on author's credit or shut up the one who picked the author's opinion :)
I have no problem with a reasoned criticism from a reputable author.
I have no problem with a reasoned criticism from an unknown author with no reputation.
I do have a problem with a troll article by someone with a very disreputable author.
Life is to short to spend it arguing with fuckwits. I do not have time to argue with any of the following:
-Those who say smoking tobacco does not cause cancer.
-Holocaust deniers.
-"Creation Science" evolution deniers.
-Global Warming deniers.
-Rob Enderly
If we are at a stage where we need to spend a large amount of time arguing with these sorts of idiots, then our civilization is in serious decline!
I found the deposition to be a gripping read. The witness was shown though the deposition to be evasive, disingenuous, and lacking expertise.
What you're missing is that Microsoft does not provide an OS; thats not what their business model is. Microsoft provides a platform.
The word "Platform" is currently very fashionable but it has very little meaning.
I am posting from a System 76 "Pangolin" laptop. I really like it. It is based on an Asus whitebook notebook. This notebook is a "Common Building Block" CBB notebook. Many of the parts interchange with parts from other manufacturers. These include the battery, power supply, keyboard and screen.
Installing the Beryl window manager was painless too.
The hardware is rather generic with Intel Wireless and graphics. I am sure that just about any distribution will work.
It also has a mind-boggling 34% short ratio, and they haven't been able to run up a short squeeze yet because everyone going short believes the worst is yet to come. That's right, over a third of the stock is held by people with an interest in SCOX's failure.
The shorts do not own stock. They owe stock. They sold the stock before they bought the stock.
Here is a picture of PJ.d etails/pg_1/id_11009230/opt_/fpt_/c_360/
http://www.cafepress.com/buy/groklaw/-/pv_design_
California Assemblyman Llyod Levine wants to make his state the first to ban incandescent lightbulbs with the "How Many Legislators Does it Take to Change a Lightbulb Act"
I would call it the "How Many Legislators Does it Take to screw his head up his ass act."It isn't MS's fault the music is restricted.
But Microsoft is responsible for how they advertise and promote the product. The are responsible for the veracity of the product description. If the feature is semi-broken for whatever reason, then they have an obligation to come clean about this. They also have an obligation to indicate which songs are "squirt" impaired before a customer makes the purchase.
Actually, if he signed something saying "all work done on company time and/or with company resources is owned by the company", he has effectively transferred the copyrights to the relevant code in advance
This Guy is a Cop not a software developer. Normal people in normal jobs do have to sign these assignment of future IP contracts.
I see linux as being solid, powerful and rugged. In this way it is like a dump trunk. Much of the Internet runs on Linux for these very reasons. I also see it as a bit like the old Volkswagen beetles. It is fairly easy to work on. It is easy to modify.
Well -- Apple OS X is like a Volvo or maybe a Porsche.
Linux is like a dump truck or maybe an air cooled Volkswagen Beetle.
And Windows is like a Yugo styled to look like a Volvo or a Porsche.
The technology for perpendicular recording has been around for years. This is just yet another way to increase areal data density on a hard drive disk. It has not shown up in production hard drives because there was lower hanging fruit ripe for picking when it came to increasing areal density.
From this article, I conclude the computer and electronic revolution has run it's course. We are not getting much innovation anymore. We are just getting incremental improvements on the innovations from years past.
But this is BAD NEWS because it's GOVERNMENT CONTROL which is EVIL because the FREE MARKET would produce the BEST RESULT for the CONSUMERS!
Industrialists love the "FREE MARKET". That is why they put so much effort in to avoiding and evading the free market. Locking customers into proprietary cables and chargers is just one example of free market avoidance.
I do not think so.
Linux has lots of semi independent parts. ...
The kernal is only kernal. You can even not use the Linux kernal and use a BSD variant. Changes to the kernal usually do not break the start-stop process.
Then there is an inner layer to the GUI. Usually this is X.org. But you could use Xfree86 instead.
Then you can use Gnome or KDE or Enlightenment or BlackBox or
The startup and stopping algorithms are in another module. It has been some sort of System V thing but some distros are switching to a newer system.
This modularity shows up throughout an opens source desktop OS.
The way these layers talk to each other is well defined so that development can proceed on these parts independently. This avoids the need for a convoluted source code repository system. The parts are small enough to be manageable.
I prefer Stephen Colbert's take: "Now, isn't an agnostic just an atheist without balls?"
Back when I was an atheist I had balls!!
But the Everywhere Girl is permanently banned from Wikipedia. The article used to be several paragraphs long.
The Everywhere Girl has been deleted from Wikipedia. Will she get restored?