Then again, there's the Apple Music Store model: 1. Design something whch works well; 2. Make a fair deal (with usually unfair people) and honor your agreement; 4. Treat those who use your service as valued customers and not like necessary evils; 5. Profit ?
Frankly if I were making decisions for Apple, I would seriously cosider *not* making a Windoze version of the Music Store. How long could it possibly take for M$ and the RIAA to agree to somethng obvious.
The fact that Apple tries to do anyting which actually helps others, albeit the small group of others who actually need it, speaks a lot about their business model. Yes, there are plenty of geeks out there who don't need help with this, whch is why I credit Apple for their effort.
Actually, the Defendant doesn't have to refute or present any evidence at all. He can sit back and let the state present its case. If the state's case is lame enough, he can simply argue that there isn't enough evidence to convict. Risky srategy, but it really does work sometimes.
Yes, but Teddy Roosevelt was not President when he was shot. He was a 3d party (Bull Moose) candidate running against President WH Taft (R) and T. Woodrow Wilson (D). If we are going to include assassinations and attempts of important politicians who were not actually President at the time, we can't ignore Huey Long, Senator of Louisiana, a/k/a "The Kingfish."
Thanks, I really did feel bad about this. Not the "being publicly wrong" part, but the "criticizing someone who in no way deserved it" part. I'm glad you were big enough to accept my apology graciously. mjf
You are correct, sir. Although this nugget of history had been placed in the hard drive between my ears about 30 years ago, a quick visit to Google corrected my long held (and mistaken) "information". I should have Googleized the question before opening my mouth. Mea culpa, and my apology to the original poster who I incorrectly corrected.
Thanks, Mr. A.C., I really needed to hear that from you. I did not intend to trash Mr. Bush's intelligence; Only his complete lack of curiosity. As I am a curious person (go ahead and take your shots), could you explain to me what "Demo scum" is.
(quote)
"If every American wrote the President of the United States on a regular basis, he and his staff would not be able to read them all AND do his work as the leader of the World's most powerful country." (quote)
I suspect that GW Bush's problem is not with the volume of mail he receives, his problem is with the "reading" part.
Actually, President Lincoln was ridiculed for insisting that citizens who wanted to meet with him make an appointment. Until that time (c. 1861), citizens could just "show up" and expect to meet with the President. The move towards making the President inaccessible has been more a function of political convenience than security.
We are not actually in disagreement. A company, even one with 90% market share, *should* be constantly trying to innovate and improve their product(s). Unfortunately, M$ has shown interest only in finding new and improved ways of separating the consumer from his/her cash.
"Educating the masses" has usually been a futile endeavor. However 2 years without anything new from M$ creates a window of opportunity for Linux distros to "catch up", and non-IE browsers to jump ahead. It wouldn't bother me at all if M$ doesn't release anything for another 10 years. They have 90% market share, and their #1 priority is holding onto it, not innovating.
Linux preloaded *anything* could make a dramatic difference. The ability to buy a PC designed for your favorite distro (meaning no compatibility issues, of course), and have it work right out of the box can have a big impact on the O/S and software business. How many people do you know who are quite capable of running Linux but gave up due to their inability to install succesfully. How many distros have you given up on out of frustration with the installation process. Once the install is included with the hardware, we may just see some real competition.
Newsflash: The Clinton Justice Department went after our dear friends at M$ and won. When Clinton left office the only question was how many pieces M$ would have to be broken into. Since Bush took over, it seems that the Justice Department has had second thoughts about actually enforcing an important legal victory. I'd kind of like to know how much money M$' directors, shareholders, employees, etc. contributed to the Bush campaign. Naaah, I'm just beig paranoid.
I am AL, and I find it extremely difficult to believe that any other L would handle this for SCO without any guaranty of payment. Please keep in mind that the *actual* fee arrangement is subject to lawyer-client confidentiality and that Mr. McBride has not displayed any "undue honesty" to date. I am willing to bet the ranch that SCO's lawyers have been paid, continue to be paid, and that a written agreement exists which clearly spells out how much more they will be paid in the event of a settlement. The absence of any mention of provisions in the event SCO wins a legal victory is purely intentional.
I do not consider Apple's ability to stay competitive to be a miracle. While Microsoft spends its $ on lawyers, Apple spends it on designers and programmers. They run a fiscally conservative company that has $4.5B in cash, almost zero debt, and continues to operate at a profit.
They also have a reputation as an honorable company--one reason why Apple was "first in" in terms of selling downloadable legal music was Apple's reputation as reasonable people to work with. (Can you imagine the negotiations between Microsoft and the RIAA; not a pretty sight.)
The fact that Apple isn't anywhere near as big a company as Microsoft has nothing to do with Apple's ability to survive and even thrive. Maybe #2 really does have to "try harder" to succeed. Judging by their products, it certainly appears that Apple is trying much harder than Microsoft.
(steps off soapbox)
Apple's #1 priority is selling Apple hardware. While they make some $ through the sale of software, harware is far and away their major source of income. I would expect that Apple is delighted when someone else writes software that works well on the Mac platform; just another reason for people to buy a Mac.
The difference between Apple and their carnivorous competitor is that Apple doesn't really care what you run on their computer, as long as you buy the computer.
Slashdot Mirror
Then again, there's the Apple Music Store model:
1. Design something whch works well;
2. Make a fair deal (with usually unfair people) and honor your agreement;
4. Treat those who use your service as valued customers and not like necessary evils;
5. Profit ?
Frankly if I were making decisions for Apple, I would seriously cosider *not* making a Windoze version of the Music Store. How long could it possibly take for M$ and the RIAA to agree to somethng obvious.
The fact that Apple tries to do anyting which actually helps others, albeit the small group of others who actually need it, speaks a lot about their business model. Yes, there are plenty of geeks out there who don't need help with this, whch is why I credit Apple for their effort.
Here's a Lawyer's opinion: Seems to me that a "subscription library" of music would make a lot more sense. Why unduly complicate things.
Actually, the Defendant doesn't have to refute or present any evidence at all. He can sit back and let the state present its case. If the state's case is lame enough, he can simply argue that there isn't enough evidence to convict. Risky srategy, but it really does work sometimes.
Perhaps they're cutting you some slack for the first 20 times.
Shut up, Bill.
Yes, but Teddy Roosevelt was not President when he was shot. He was a 3d party (Bull Moose) candidate running against President WH Taft (R) and T. Woodrow Wilson (D). If we are going to include assassinations and attempts of important politicians who were not actually President at the time, we can't ignore Huey Long, Senator of Louisiana, a/k/a "The Kingfish."
Thanks, I really did feel bad about this. Not the "being publicly wrong" part, but the "criticizing someone who in no way deserved it" part. I'm glad you were big enough to accept my apology graciously.
mjf
You are correct, sir. Although this nugget of history had been placed in the hard drive between my ears about 30 years ago, a quick visit to Google corrected my long held (and mistaken) "information". I should have Googleized the question before opening my mouth. Mea culpa, and my apology to the original poster who I incorrectly corrected.
Thanks, Mr. A.C., I really needed to hear that from you. I did not intend to trash Mr. Bush's intelligence; Only his complete lack of curiosity. As I am a curious person (go ahead and take your shots), could you explain to me what "Demo scum" is.
(quote) "If every American wrote the President of the United States on a regular basis, he and his staff would not be able to read them all AND do his work as the leader of the World's most powerful country." (quote) I suspect that GW Bush's problem is not with the volume of mail he receives, his problem is with the "reading" part.
Then you should remember that Cermak was the Mayor of Buffalo, not Chicago. :)
You have omitted our 20th President, James Garfield who was also assasinated.
Actually, President Lincoln was ridiculed for insisting that citizens who wanted to meet with him make an appointment. Until that time (c. 1861), citizens could just "show up" and expect to meet with the President. The move towards making the President inaccessible has been more a function of political convenience than security.
We are not actually in disagreement. A company, even one with 90% market share, *should* be constantly trying to innovate and improve their product(s). Unfortunately, M$ has shown interest only in finding new and improved ways of separating the consumer from his/her cash.
"Educating the masses" has usually been a futile endeavor. However 2 years without anything new from M$ creates a window of opportunity for Linux distros to "catch up", and non-IE browsers to jump ahead. It wouldn't bother me at all if M$ doesn't release anything for another 10 years. They have 90% market share, and their #1 priority is holding onto it, not innovating.
Linux preloaded *anything* could make a dramatic difference. The ability to buy a PC designed for your favorite distro (meaning no compatibility issues, of course), and have it work right out of the box can have a big impact on the O/S and software business. How many people do you know who are quite capable of running Linux but gave up due to their inability to install succesfully. How many distros have you given up on out of frustration with the installation process. Once the install is included with the hardware, we may just see some real competition.
Touche'. ;-)
Newsflash: The Clinton Justice Department went after our dear friends at M$ and won. When Clinton left office the only question was how many pieces M$ would have to be broken into. Since Bush took over, it seems that the Justice Department has had second thoughts about actually enforcing an important legal victory. I'd kind of like to know how much money M$' directors, shareholders, employees, etc. contributed to the Bush campaign. Naaah, I'm just beig paranoid.
I am AL, and I find it extremely difficult to believe that any other L would handle this for SCO without any guaranty of payment. Please keep in mind that the *actual* fee arrangement is subject to lawyer-client confidentiality and that Mr. McBride has not displayed any "undue honesty" to date. I am willing to bet the ranch that SCO's lawyers have been paid, continue to be paid, and that a written agreement exists which clearly spells out how much more they will be paid in the event of a settlement. The absence of any mention of provisions in the event SCO wins a legal victory is purely intentional.
I do not consider Apple's ability to stay competitive to be a miracle. While Microsoft spends its $ on lawyers, Apple spends it on designers and programmers. They run a fiscally conservative company that has $4.5B in cash, almost zero debt, and continues to operate at a profit. They also have a reputation as an honorable company--one reason why Apple was "first in" in terms of selling downloadable legal music was Apple's reputation as reasonable people to work with. (Can you imagine the negotiations between Microsoft and the RIAA; not a pretty sight.) The fact that Apple isn't anywhere near as big a company as Microsoft has nothing to do with Apple's ability to survive and even thrive. Maybe #2 really does have to "try harder" to succeed. Judging by their products, it certainly appears that Apple is trying much harder than Microsoft. (steps off soapbox)
Apple's #1 priority is selling Apple hardware. While they make some $ through the sale of software, harware is far and away their major source of income. I would expect that Apple is delighted when someone else writes software that works well on the Mac platform; just another reason for people to buy a Mac. The difference between Apple and their carnivorous competitor is that Apple doesn't really care what you run on their computer, as long as you buy the computer.
The only thing surprising here is that Apple didn't release their own branded browser before 2003. And it's still in beta.