It is overpriced to you because it does not fit in with what you value apparently.
I really hope that you are an educated consumer and that you consider the personal value of an object when making the determination of whether a product is overpriced or not.
Whether a product is overpriced has nothing to do with mathematical formulas or features per dollar (to not geeks anyway). Rather, whether a product is overpriced or a bargain depends on whether you like the products, whether you value the features it provides and whether or not the value you place on all of that outweighs the "price".
To put it simply, it is a subjective value judgement.
No, you are either trolling or you have no taste. Music is something you can listen to over and over again whereas a video will probably only hold your interest for one viewing every couple of years or so. Something is overpriced when its value to an individual is less than the asking price. It really has nothing to do with the dollar value of the object and will vary for each individual. I you understood anything about art, you would understand that.
Given that you would equate a minute of a mindless television with a minute of good music, it shows how little your opinion on art and music is worth. It also show that you are not someone we should listen to with regard to the "value" of a song or video. The replay value of a good song would more than make up the difference in price within a month or so.
I still don't think you get what intent/spirit of a law of means. The intent of the copyright holders in choosing the GPL was to facilitate community involvement in improving the product while preventing competitors from releasing closed source derivatives. In this case, the community did not contribute to the product in any way. That is called being a leech. Now if the OSS community decided to turn around and fork the product now, how would you consider that fair to the original authors?
I don't give a damn whether it is allowed by letter of the law or the license because what I'm talking about is fairness and respect. Obviously, neither of those concepts seem to mean much to you and you seem to think that morality and the law are somehow intrinsically linked.
The law is blind to morality and justice as it is a non entity. This is why some of us are fortunate to live under the common law system where the intent/spirit of a law is considered when a law is interpreted by a judge.
Did you not RTFA? Nobody was contributing outside of the company. Are you suggesting people now fork it and screw them over even more? Isn't that taking advantage of their original generosity? Just because you can fork it legally, it does not mean you should. It's bad karma to do so. Had the community exerted some effort to improve it before this decision, you might have a moral case to do so. I would hope that only bug fixes would be done for the GPL'ed version. Creating an active fork would be dishonest and unethical since it would no doubt compete with the new version by using mostly the hard work of the company employees.
You have an opportunity to show the world that the open source community is capable of working with the closed source community, respects copyright holders wishes and is capable of admitting their mistakes. To do as you suggest would give the impression that the OSS community is petty, cheap, amoral and willing to profit off the sweat of others without having contributed to the project you would effectively be stealing from the company.
There is the wording of a license/law and then there is the spirit of it. You would be going against the spirit/intent of it.
Your XFree86 example is nothing like this situation. In this case, there was no community involvement but rather a bunch of leeches. You don't want to be a leech do you?
Yeah and that's great and all and I like how the clueless execs talked on Paul Thurrott blog site that "blog" linked to. Blogs are great entertainment but hardly what I would call news or "information".
Those execs dismiss Apple because they are talking to the converted. What do you expect them to say? Ballmer knows full well that they are getting their asses handed to them in the music arena. They are shitting their pants over it but they cannot let on in front of the faithful.
Interestingly enough you are right that they are now part of the same group that the Xbox is in but did you notice that Mac Office profits offset Xbox "losses"? I don't care what they said in public, the profit Office for Mac creates for them is very important to them. The mobile technology products are also in the same group after the restructuring. Those mac products keep that division from looking like a total financial disaster.
It does not bother me in the slightest that the MBU is not in the same group as the Windows Office people. Have you looked at the quality of Office for Mac versus the Windows version? I would not want the fools working on the Windows version of office working on the mac version. It is a big plus for me that they are completely separate. I hope that the MBU is able to work on a future version of WMP for OS X as the current version is a piece of crap.
Microsoft figures that it owns Apple anyway, with that big investment it made to save Apple so many years ago.
You are either trolling or simply spouting the same clueless myths you have heard elsewhere. The investment was minor compared to the value of shares in the market and billions of dollars Apple had in the bank. It was a token gesture. The real deal involved a multi-year commitment to continue the development of MS Office for the mac platform. This all stemmed from the lawsuit over the UI between Apple and MSFT and it was all part of an out of court settlement.
MSFT investment in Apple stock was not as "big" as you may have imagined and they sold that stock long before the recent rise in stock price and stock split.
MSFT's commitment to the mac platform helped out Apple much more than any token monetary investment did by legitimising the company in the eyes of the business community and helping to sustain third-party development on the mac. Had they not done so, it is possible that the platform could have died out after other developers like Adobe would have abandoned the mac platform.
That's interesting considering the MBU is on a separate campus in Southern California and it is afterall called the Mac "Business" Unit. The XBox team located on the MSFT Campus in Redmond.
You really should brush up on your history. MS Word and Excel were first delivered on the Macintosh. The Mac Business Unit has been a profitable group for some time now.
Yeah and those developers work for free and don't need or want any donations to keep development going.
...wait a second. Maybe you should think about either supporting the project directly or purchasing Star Office to encourage Sun into pouring more money and development time into the Open Office project.
Open Office is not really "free" even though you are not "forced" to pay anything for it. Supporting those involved would be a way of showing your gratitude for their efforts.
I guess I can go back to buying one CD every three years or so and downloading off newgroups. I've bought more music in the past year from iTMS Canada than I have for the past 15 years in the form of CD's. As the article pointed out, people like me are buying music from iTMS because we have iPods already and because the store offers consistent pricing and end usage rights. It follows the KISS principle. Apparently these execs do not understand the KISS principle.
Pull the plug and on iTMS and I'll pull the plug on your revenue. You will not see a dime from me. Have fun on the unemployment line when sales tank.
Did you bother reading his post? Does GNUmeric support Pivot tables and other analysis tools? If not, why did you bother mentioning it? Because it starts with GNU?
Explain to us how a free version with less features and interoperability will be a killer for Office while Star Office will not? The 70 dollar price tag? Uh pal, MSFT came into the position they are in now because of penetration into the corporate sector. Once it was entrenched there, people wanted to be compatible with the office so they bought it for the home. Star Office offers brand recognition and is backed directly by Sun Microsystems. From the perspective of an IT purchaser, they will look at Star Office before they would look at Open Office. These guys don't want to mess around with downloading an installer for beta/alpha versions of Open Office but rather want a stable release with extra features like spell checking, dictionaries, clip art libraries and pre-configured database interfaces.
A price tag of 70 bucks is nothing. How much time does it cost you to setup Open Office properly and how much time is spent updating beta releases? Price that out at a typical IT workers pay rate and figure out which one is cheaper. *Hint* ?It's the Star Office version.
Will they fix the record limit problem?
on
Office 12 Exposed
·
· Score: 1
I want them to fix the 65k limit on the number of records.
One small correction. Admin accounts are members of the admin group, not wheel. The wheel group is where the root account resides (root account disabled however)
It would be dangerous to put an admin account into the wheel group as that would give it root level privileges to some resources.
The admin group is however in the Sudoers list which gives temporary root level access when you enter in a your password again.
Is your laptop an iBook or pBook? Unfortunately, Bluetooth support on XP is an afterthought/hack so you probably not be able to do what he describes easily, if at all, on a WinIntel laptop.
Stop spreading FUD to the uninitiated. You are either trolling or you know just enough to be dangerous. A DoS is a Denial of Service which may temporarily block access to a network or worst case crash the stack possibly forcing a reboot. Big deal. I believe I was responding to exploits which could be used to "run" code.
Nobody is going to DoS a workstation anyway. Come on let's be realistic here.
How about reading the article before commenting? What does "no open port by default" mean to you?
To me, it means that you can put a mac on a network in the default configuration and have a 100% secure configuration.
With OS X, you can get security with the following:
1. Setup regular accounts for other users who share your computer. keeping admin account to yourself and not enabling root.
2. There is no step 2.
This prescription works for anyone other than say the NSA or CIA.
You can only lock down an OS to a certain degree without impeding productivity of users. If the OS is insecure by default, locking it down could affect the functionality of the software users run on the machine. However, if you have a pretty secure system to start with your software is likely to function as it normally would.
The admin account is like the new admin accounts in Windows Vista. You are prompted for your admin password if you are about to install a system level extension.
The OS X admin account does not have root level access like Windows pre-Vista.
It's to prevent propogation of MS Office macro viruses which target windows users.
I personally nolonger use any antivirus of any kind because I do not exchange MS Office documents with windows users so I considering running one a waste of time and resources.
Slashdot Mirror
I really hope that you are an educated consumer and that you consider the personal value of an object when making the determination of whether a product is overpriced or not.
Whether a product is overpriced has nothing to do with mathematical formulas or features per dollar (to not geeks anyway). Rather, whether a product is overpriced or a bargain depends on whether you like the products, whether you value the features it provides and whether or not the value you place on all of that outweighs the "price".
To put it simply, it is a subjective value judgement.
Given that you would equate a minute of a mindless television with a minute of good music, it shows how little your opinion on art and music is worth. It also show that you are not someone we should listen to with regard to the "value" of a song or video. The replay value of a good song would more than make up the difference in price within a month or so.
This front row app is aimed at teens, college students in dorms with limited space or people with small apartments.
Tivo is an American phenomenon but even then, it is a niche product. You are a tech geek, the Average Joe probably does not know what a Tivo is.
Stop reading slashdot for a while and interact with "real" regular people for a while to get rid of your myopic world view.
Yeah, that is if you visit the page with a PC. If you visit with a mac, the iMac is displayed. They detect your OS.
I don't give a damn whether it is allowed by letter of the law or the license because what I'm talking about is fairness and respect. Obviously, neither of those concepts seem to mean much to you and you seem to think that morality and the law are somehow intrinsically linked.
The law is blind to morality and justice as it is a non entity. This is why some of us are fortunate to live under the common law system where the intent/spirit of a law is considered when a law is interpreted by a judge.
You have an opportunity to show the world that the open source community is capable of working with the closed source community, respects copyright holders wishes and is capable of admitting their mistakes. To do as you suggest would give the impression that the OSS community is petty, cheap, amoral and willing to profit off the sweat of others without having contributed to the project you would effectively be stealing from the company.
There is the wording of a license/law and then there is the spirit of it. You would be going against the spirit/intent of it.
Your XFree86 example is nothing like this situation. In this case, there was no community involvement but rather a bunch of leeches. You don't want to be a leech do you?
Those execs dismiss Apple because they are talking to the converted. What do you expect them to say? Ballmer knows full well that they are getting their asses handed to them in the music arena. They are shitting their pants over it but they cannot let on in front of the faithful.
Interestingly enough you are right that they are now part of the same group that the Xbox is in but did you notice that Mac Office profits offset Xbox "losses"? I don't care what they said in public, the profit Office for Mac creates for them is very important to them. The mobile technology products are also in the same group after the restructuring. Those mac products keep that division from looking like a total financial disaster.
It does not bother me in the slightest that the MBU is not in the same group as the Windows Office people. Have you looked at the quality of Office for Mac versus the Windows version? I would not want the fools working on the Windows version of office working on the mac version. It is a big plus for me that they are completely separate. I hope that the MBU is able to work on a future version of WMP for OS X as the current version is a piece of crap.
You are either trolling or simply spouting the same clueless myths you have heard elsewhere. The investment was minor compared to the value of shares in the market and billions of dollars Apple had in the bank. It was a token gesture. The real deal involved a multi-year commitment to continue the development of MS Office for the mac platform. This all stemmed from the lawsuit over the UI between Apple and MSFT and it was all part of an out of court settlement.
MSFT investment in Apple stock was not as "big" as you may have imagined and they sold that stock long before the recent rise in stock price and stock split.
MSFT's commitment to the mac platform helped out Apple much more than any token monetary investment did by legitimising the company in the eyes of the business community and helping to sustain third-party development on the mac. Had they not done so, it is possible that the platform could have died out after other developers like Adobe would have abandoned the mac platform.
Nice troll pal.
You really should brush up on your history. MS Word and Excel were first delivered on the Macintosh. The Mac Business Unit has been a profitable group for some time now.
Open Office is not really "free" even though you are not "forced" to pay anything for it. Supporting those involved would be a way of showing your gratitude for their efforts.
Pull the plug and on iTMS and I'll pull the plug on your revenue. You will not see a dime from me. Have fun on the unemployment line when sales tank.
Did you bother reading his post? Does GNUmeric support Pivot tables and other analysis tools? If not, why did you bother mentioning it? Because it starts with GNU?
A price tag of 70 bucks is nothing. How much time does it cost you to setup Open Office properly and how much time is spent updating beta releases? Price that out at a typical IT workers pay rate and figure out which one is cheaper. *Hint* ?It's the Star Office version.
I want them to fix the 65k limit on the number of records.
A quick search on google gave me this: How To Use Your GSM Cell Phone as a Bluetooth Modem on Mac OS X and another hint.
No, you have to open up Netinfo Manager but there is absolutely no reason to enable it. Anyone who did enable it should be shot.
It would be dangerous to put an admin account into the wheel group as that would give it root level privileges to some resources.
The admin group is however in the Sudoers list which gives temporary root level access when you enter in a your password again.
Is your laptop an iBook or pBook? Unfortunately, Bluetooth support on XP is an afterthought/hack so you probably not be able to do what he describes easily, if at all, on a WinIntel laptop.
Nobody is going to DoS a workstation anyway. Come on let's be realistic here.
To me, it means that you can put a mac on a network in the default configuration and have a 100% secure configuration.
With OS X, you can get security with the following:
1. Setup regular accounts for other users who share your computer. keeping admin account to yourself and not enabling root.
2. There is no step 2.
This prescription works for anyone other than say the NSA or CIA.
You can only lock down an OS to a certain degree without impeding productivity of users. If the OS is insecure by default, locking it down could affect the functionality of the software users run on the machine. However, if you have a pretty secure system to start with your software is likely to function as it normally would.
The OS X admin account does not have root level access like Windows pre-Vista.
How do you spill pizza anyway?
I personally nolonger use any antivirus of any kind because I do not exchange MS Office documents with windows users so I considering running one a waste of time and resources.