So, would you and the current +4 moderators say the same thing if MS disabled Netscape for you and put IE in its place? How about disabling Winamp and forcing you to use WMP? What about automatically wiping out and replacing your boot manager?
I would say you're foolish for offering such a poor analogy. iTunes didn't disable MM it only removed the Apple-supplied component that synched MM with the iPod.
To reiterate: iTunes only uninstalls APPLE SOFTWARE when it runs.
So an *good* analogy might be:
MSN (the service, not the network connectivity) ships with a hook into Netscape that uses Netscape as the browser for MSN. Then, when a new version of MSN and IE come out it removes the Microsoft component the allows Netscape to work as the browser for MSN but otherwise leaves Netscape on your computer and fully functional.
So assuming that we could naturally ingest these Reoviri, would someone in a cleaner environment be at a higher risk for cancer (or more to the point, a higher risk from dieing before the Reovirus healed them)? It would be really interesting to find out that drinking bottled water and organtic foods is actually increasing the risk of death from cancer.
That line of reasoning would certainly support George Carlin's assertion that he is healthy as an adult because as a child he "swam in raw sewage!!!"
If they were worried about print screen they would have simply made the contents of a protected email disappear when the window did not have the focus. Problem solved.
But when Apple used Apple benchmarks to show off the performance of G5, macheads were extacic at the performance.
Prior to the G5 it was virtually impossible to come up with any benchmark that showed the G4 in the same ballpark as the P4. So "macheads" were excited to see that the G5 was now competitive with x86 offerings.
Questioning the motives of the arguer is certainly valid. However, it should not be done in the absence of judging (without bias) the argument made. Your statements indicate that you did not do this.
Hindsight is not always 20/20. Some people still don't see well, even in retrospect.
Because of the restrictions placed on PC vendors by Microsoft it was almost inevitable that a company like Dell would appear. Few options were available to vendors. They could innovate on form factor. But the corporate world sees that as just fluff. They could innovate on peripherals. But that doesn't do much to sell PCs. Or, they could innovate in the area of business processes. That's what Dell did and it has worked well for them.
The only way Apple could have competed with Dell would have been to get into the corporate space. People eventually just wanted the same machine at home as at work. Switching to Intel processors would not have helped. There were other factors involved.
Of course they do! The subpoena doesn't establish guilt -- it only provides the name of the person that the RIAA wants file suit against.
So next, these 260 people (those that don't settle) will go to court, and not until then would they be guilty of anything.
btw, the question of whether this 'fast track' subpoena process is ok is entirely different from the question of whether it's reasonable for the RIAA to sue people that have illegally amassed collections of thousands of MP3s.
If you read my note again you will see that is exactly what I said. The subpoena process bypasses the courts.
FYI, I can't walk up to the door at Comcast and ask for the name and phone number of a user based on their IP. But if I show up with an RIAA badge I can. That's the problem. The fact that people are being sued using that information is besides the point.
But if you actually get targeted by the RIAA and can prove that you already owned all the CDs, I'd guess that they would drop that case anyway.
But see, that's the kicker. Currently the RIAA does not need to prove (or even provide evidence of the charge) to a judge or anyone else that you did anything wrong. All they have to do is fill out a form and they get to subpoena your contact information from the ISP.
The fact that people are getting sued is a sideshow. The fact that the courts aren't involved in the subpoena process is the real issue.
I wonder what kind of laptops will be issued. Physical fitness classes are on their way out and we wouldn't want the kids throwing their back out lugging around a Dell.
Have you seen the stats? 90% of slashdot users use windows or mac's.. Not saying that nobody here is a tech, but honestly, the majority are actually not really techs.
Your assumption seems to be that someone who uses a Windows or Mac machine is not technical. Care to back that up?
I also seem to recall that the phone system generally drops any signals higher than 4khz. So it's not just the quality of the phone line that is the issue.
Maybe if you had settled on one argument you would have been more coherent. As it is you made two arguments and neither had any real intellectual value. I have no idea how your post got +1 interesting.
Even though no new laws are being created, the government is setting a precedent that it can control pretty much any company that it deams worthy of being contolled.
What part of the Sherman Act don't you understand? The precedent was set long ago but our esteemed Republican president Teddy Roosevelt.
And what part of our legal system don't you understand? There are courts and judges that decide these things. It's not like the justice department issues a decree and that's what happens.
If I make a better product, how is that anti-competitive? Like it or not, MS made a prodict that was good enough to propell it to the top of its industry.
First you say "better" then you say "good enough". Which is it? The problem with abusing monopoly power is that it can take an inferior product and make it the winner. If it was a true competition the better product would have won. Since the better product didn't win due to monopoly power that is by definition anti-competitive.
Wouldn't a fact based approach make more sense if the facts came before the conclusions? Microsoft seems to want to do it the other way around. And isn't that just marketing?
The conditions of use just say that you can't "use the service" from outside the US. I would argue that purchasing the songs would be considered using the service but listening to them would not be. It's too bad that Apple is taking the wider approach here.
You mean in this case, it wasn't good code. You can't blame CMM for that. So you had a well-managed bunch of coders who were no good. Yeah, that happens.
I wasn't "blaming" CMM for anything. My original statement is still in the subject line. The fact that you can have a well-managed bunch of poor coders is simply more proof of its truth.
Heh. I am involved in documenting some of our "processes" for our CMM evaluation
I really hate the fact that an organization doesn't have to use the processes for very long before it can get its CMM rating. To me, throwing some processes together and then using them for 2-3 weeks doesn't constitute a "mature organization."
The reason they are "smaller and ligther" is because they become less and less existent.
Not true (or, at least, not necessarily true). It's because when an organization first implements a set of processes for CMM it doesn't know what the hell it is doing. So typically the first set of processes implemented goes WAAAAAY overboard and adds lots more than is really necessary to get the benefit.
Then, as the organization matures, it can see what really adds the benefit and what is fluff. The fluff can then be removed. This is really what it means to be a "mature organization."
Of course, some organizations really don't care about the benefit and, as you say, just pretty much stop doing the things that got them their rating in the first place.
Getting the rating is another sort of scam and don't even get me started there.
I think we are kind of agreeing - you can't have just one or the other.
I agree. You need good code, good management, good marketing, etc... to have a good product. CMM speaks mostly to management but does touch on code a tiny little bit.
You can be insulted all you want, but until you realize that there is more to it than just solid code, you lose.
I have worked in a CMM level 3 organization for a couple of years. I understand its benefits. One of them is not "good code."
Again, it isn't all about who writes the best code. For the most part, code is code.
Totally disagree. That's like saying "project management is project management." Bad coders can write well-estimated, properly documented code that is a b*tch to maintain because it was written poorly.
Mature organizations that follow a solid process will be able to handle pressure consistently better.
I agree. What's ironic is that as an organization matures it tends to get smaller, lighter processes instead of the monstrosities that tend to be in place at the beginning.
Slashdot Mirror
So, would you and the current +4 moderators say the same thing if MS disabled Netscape for you and put IE in its place? How about disabling Winamp and forcing you to use WMP? What about automatically wiping out and replacing your boot manager?
I would say you're foolish for offering such a poor analogy. iTunes didn't disable MM it only removed the Apple-supplied component that synched MM with the iPod.
To reiterate: iTunes only uninstalls APPLE SOFTWARE when it runs.
So an *good* analogy might be:
MSN (the service, not the network connectivity) ships with a hook into Netscape that uses Netscape as the browser for MSN. Then, when a new version of MSN and IE come out it removes the Microsoft component the allows Netscape to work as the browser for MSN but otherwise leaves Netscape on your computer and fully functional.
So assuming that we could naturally ingest these Reoviri, would someone in a cleaner environment be at a higher risk for cancer (or more to the point, a higher risk from dieing before the Reovirus healed them)? It would be really interesting to find out that drinking bottled water and organtic foods is actually increasing the risk of death from cancer.
That line of reasoning would certainly support George Carlin's assertion that he is healthy as an adult because as a child he "swam in raw sewage!!!"
four words: bundled with the OS
:)
Sorry, that's five
If they were worried about print screen they would have simply made the contents of a protected email disappear when the window did not have the focus. Problem solved.
have you tried any 3rd party screen capture software?
But when Apple used Apple benchmarks to show off the performance of G5, macheads were extacic at the performance.
Prior to the G5 it was virtually impossible to come up with any benchmark that showed the G4 in the same ballpark as the P4. So "macheads" were excited to see that the G5 was now competitive with x86 offerings.
Questioning the motives of the arguer is certainly valid. However, it should not be done in the absence of judging (without bias) the argument made. Your statements indicate that you did not do this.
Hindsight is not always 20/20. Some people still don't see well, even in retrospect.
Because of the restrictions placed on PC vendors by Microsoft it was almost inevitable that a company like Dell would appear. Few options were available to vendors. They could innovate on form factor. But the corporate world sees that as just fluff. They could innovate on peripherals. But that doesn't do much to sell PCs. Or, they could innovate in the area of business processes. That's what Dell did and it has worked well for them.
The only way Apple could have competed with Dell would have been to get into the corporate space. People eventually just wanted the same machine at home as at work. Switching to Intel processors would not have helped. There were other factors involved.
Yeah, some people still don't "get it"
The cheapest desktop I see on Apple's site is $2K.
Then perhaps you ought to click on the PowerMac G4 picture near the bottom of the store. You will find desktops there for $1299
I understand. That's why I said "subpoena process" and not "trial".
Of course they do! The subpoena doesn't establish guilt -- it only provides the name of the person that the RIAA wants file suit against.
So next, these 260 people (those that don't settle) will go to court, and not until then would they be guilty of anything.
btw, the question of whether this 'fast track' subpoena process is ok is entirely different from the question of whether it's reasonable for the RIAA to sue people that have illegally amassed collections of thousands of MP3s.
If you read my note again you will see that is exactly what I said. The subpoena process bypasses the courts.
FYI, I can't walk up to the door at Comcast and ask for the name and phone number of a user based on their IP. But if I show up with an RIAA badge I can. That's the problem. The fact that people are being sued using that information is besides the point.
But if you actually get targeted by the RIAA and can prove that you already owned all the CDs, I'd guess that they would drop that case anyway.
But see, that's the kicker. Currently the RIAA does not need to prove (or even provide evidence of the charge) to a judge or anyone else that you did anything wrong. All they have to do is fill out a form and they get to subpoena your contact information from the ISP.
The fact that people are getting sued is a sideshow. The fact that the courts aren't involved in the subpoena process is the real issue.
I wonder what kind of laptops will be issued. Physical fitness classes are on their way out and we wouldn't want the kids throwing their back out lugging around a Dell.
Have you seen the stats? 90% of slashdot users use windows or mac's
Not saying that nobody here is a tech, but honestly, the majority are actually not really techs.
Your assumption seems to be that someone who uses a Windows or Mac machine is not technical. Care to back that up?
I also seem to recall that the phone system generally drops any signals higher than 4khz. So it's not just the quality of the phone line that is the issue.
WARNING -- Data from the early 1990's -- WARNING
What's with the gum-drops on the right hand side of the title bar? Is this like OS X for left-handed people?
I still giggle whenever I hear someone say "what's a S0C4?"
Maybe if you had settled on one argument you would have been more coherent. As it is you made two arguments and neither had any real intellectual value. I have no idea how your post got +1 interesting.
Even though no new laws are being created, the government is setting a precedent that it can control pretty much any company that it deams worthy of being contolled.
What part of the Sherman Act don't you understand? The precedent was set long ago but our esteemed Republican president Teddy Roosevelt.
And what part of our legal system don't you understand? There are courts and judges that decide these things. It's not like the justice department issues a decree and that's what happens.
If I make a better product, how is that anti-competitive? Like it or not, MS made a prodict that was good enough to propell it to the top of its industry.
First you say "better" then you say "good enough". Which is it? The problem with abusing monopoly power is that it can take an inferior product and make it the winner. If it was a true competition the better product would have won. Since the better product didn't win due to monopoly power that is by definition anti-competitive.
Wouldn't a fact based approach make more sense if the facts came before the conclusions? Microsoft seems to want to do it the other way around. And isn't that just marketing?
The conditions of use just say that you can't "use the service" from outside the US. I would argue that purchasing the songs would be considered using the service but listening to them would not be. It's too bad that Apple is taking the wider approach here.
I hope this means I will soon be able to download movies of Mile High Club members from usenet!
You mean in this case, it wasn't good code. You can't blame CMM for that. So you had a well-managed bunch of coders who were no good. Yeah, that happens.
I wasn't "blaming" CMM for anything. My original statement is still in the subject line. The fact that you can have a well-managed bunch of poor coders is simply more proof of its truth.
Heh. I am involved in documenting some of our "processes" for our CMM evaluation
I really hate the fact that an organization doesn't have to use the processes for very long before it can get its CMM rating. To me, throwing some processes together and then using them for 2-3 weeks doesn't constitute a "mature organization."
The reason they are "smaller and ligther" is because they become less and less existent.
Not true (or, at least, not necessarily true). It's because when an organization first implements a set of processes for CMM it doesn't know what the hell it is doing. So typically the first set of processes implemented goes WAAAAAY overboard and adds lots more than is really necessary to get the benefit.
Then, as the organization matures, it can see what really adds the benefit and what is fluff. The fluff can then be removed. This is really what it means to be a "mature organization."
Of course, some organizations really don't care about the benefit and, as you say, just pretty much stop doing the things that got them their rating in the first place.
Getting the rating is another sort of scam and don't even get me started there.
I think we are kind of agreeing - you can't have just one or the other.
I agree. You need good code, good management, good marketing, etc... to have a good product. CMM speaks mostly to management but does touch on code a tiny little bit.
A defined, repeatable process that babysits each coder to the nth degree is more likely to get shipped overseas because it is SO inefficient.
There are certainly processes that can benefit the engineering side of software development but CMM doesn't speak to them much.
You can be insulted all you want, but until you realize that there is more to it than just solid code, you lose.
I have worked in a CMM level 3 organization for a couple of years. I understand its benefits. One of them is not "good code."
Again, it isn't all about who writes the best code. For the most part, code is code.
Totally disagree. That's like saying "project management is project management." Bad coders can write well-estimated, properly documented code that is a b*tch to maintain because it was written poorly.
Mature organizations that follow a solid process will be able to handle pressure consistently better.
I agree. What's ironic is that as an organization matures it tends to get smaller, lighter processes instead of the monstrosities that tend to be in place at the beginning.
Achieving a CMM level != understanding
Sounds like ISO9001 certification.
Yes. It is very much like it.