This guy is an arse hole. Why on earth would MS want to stop people having to by Windows to run office? Office draws people to Windows like nothing else - period.
MS would only do this if they had real competition for their office suite and people were moving to Linux at such a rate that Windows was being sidelined.
We don't hate the Americans. We don't hate America. In fact, I don't think I've ever met an American I couldn't get on with and I take my holidays in the US every year.
It just those idiots they (didn't?) elect to run their country we object to.
Microsoft has never been interested in helping the community but rather wants only to further its own dominance of the market. When did they start being philanthropic?
What's to say in a few years time when everyone is relying on this that they don't pull some stunt and start charging people? Do you know enough about the law to say they couldn't?
Anyway their record on enhancing email is not good. I knew the first time I saw the ability to embed HTML and * SCRIPTS * into email that the virus writers would have a field day. I mean, what complete arseholes to allow code to be executed when someone just *reads* and email. It beggars belief!
If they are serious they could assign their patents over to the FSF and then we'll consider it. I bet they won't.
Point is they will be able to form more than a anonymous relationship with you. Once they have your credit card then it becomes a lot more easy for them to 'Offer premium' services you cannot live without. Sam kinda reason people offer free trials.
>> I'm going to create several hotmail accounts, send hundreds of e-mails between them, and then reject them as "spam".
And there is maybe the true story. If you have MicroPayments and you use a Hotmail account, you will have to give his Billness your credit card details. He'll love that.
Talking call centers which I know a bit about, it always seems to be the case that the lower you pay someone the more control the employer wants over them.
I think SCO are asking for things their not entitled to uder their agreement with these people. I suggest they reply with the following:
Dear SCO
We confirm we are in full compliance with our contractual obligations to you as a UNIX licensor.
Regards
I've gone from maybe 10 spams a week to over 140 a day in the last year. It's a joke! I only get 5 or 6 real emails a day.
I don't care what new geek ideas get invented, RFC's published or laws get passed. The ONLY way to stop this cancer is to make sending an email COST. FULL STOP. My la-la ears are on until you all agree with me;)
I think people see three problems with Nuclear power generation.
1. It might blow up or some similar disaster.
This is what this type of reactor is designed to eliminate.
2. During its operation, it may pollute the environment with radioactive waste.
This is IMHO the unanswered question.
3. Decommissioning and storage of Nuclear waste is unattractive.
I think this is an easy one. We already have places on earth that are so horribly polluted that adding more would have no detrimental effect on the environment - just put it a mile below the surface. Take a look at http://www.ga.gov.au/oracle/nukexp_query.html for possible sites. (America is lucky enough to have some very good sites indeed;)
Wise up people - we all like our homes to be warm, our nice large cars and our industry that produce the goods we buy - it all takes energy.
The ONLY reason we don't have more Nuclear energy is that we have sufficient fossil fuels (currently) for our needs. Just watch what happens when this starts to run out - then we'll see how serious people are with not wanting this type of energy.
>> You couldn't sell a product - for instance - with a label saying "this product may break without warning after only a few days.
That's because there are laws governing your rights when a company sell you a product.
And I would guess (IANAL) that sililar laws govern sales of licences.
We're not going back to the laws of the wild west here - people cannot sign away consumer rights using a contract - well, they can put whatever they want in them but they don;t trump consumer laws.
I really to think that these kind of things are best governed by the free market. Use your wallet, tell your friends.
I wasn't commenting on the relationships artists have with their agents. I do 'get' the internet. If someone wants to publish their works via the internet then the're free to do so. Its their choice.
BUT, and here is the big one, if an artist chooses, for whatever reason, not to then that is not a green light for every tealeaf to nick their work.
>>Digital production and the internet levels the playing field for ALL ARTISTS! If you mean that every artist can look forward to no reward for their work, I would have to agree with you.
>>How can a simple author possibly make a living just with his pen? Two words: Harry Potter (well, her pen)
Please people, don't get too excited. This technology has been around for many years in different forms. RPC, DCOM, etc. It's nothing new really, just the same ideas dressed slightly differently.
If we use your logic, then it would be totally OK for someone to work for 10 years on a book only to sell one copy to a thief who copy's it and posts it for everyone on the internet to read.
So the author receives one payment of $10 for his 10 years work.
Maybe you disagree? Maybe in this case it would not be fair? Who decides whose work should be protected and who's shouldn't?
Unless we protect the rights of artists to profit from their works then we, the general public, will suffer with no works published at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Unlike yourself!
Both these products use virtualization on x86 - look at the benchmarks!
I use VMWARE heavly and have nothing but good to say about it. Does exactly what it says it will.
I've yet to find any software it won't run.
This guy is an arse hole. Why on earth would MS want to stop people having to by Windows to run office? Office draws people to Windows like nothing else - period.
MS would only do this if they had real competition for their office suite and people were moving to Linux at such a rate that Windows was being sidelined.
Wake up people - it aint happening!
We don't hate the Americans. We don't hate America. In fact, I don't think I've ever met an American I couldn't get on with and I take my holidays in the US every year.
It just those idiots they (didn't?) elect to run their country we object to.
Fabulious idea. I'll willingly donate $30 to the cause.
I suggest a domain name such as 'www.YouCanPatentAnything.org'
I say ignore them.
Microsoft has never been interested in helping the community but rather wants only to further its own dominance of the market. When did they start being philanthropic?
What's to say in a few years time when everyone is relying on this that they don't pull some stunt and start charging people? Do you know enough about the law to say they couldn't?
Anyway their record on enhancing email is not good. I knew the first time I saw the ability to embed HTML and * SCRIPTS * into email that the virus writers would have a field day. I mean, what complete arseholes to allow code to be executed when someone just *reads* and email. It beggars belief!
If they are serious they could assign their patents over to the FSF and then we'll consider it. I bet they won't.
For god sake - It's a bloody difficuly sell when the bloody name keeps changing.
Now I have to tell people that the Mozilla Browser was dead, was called FireBird and is now named after a 80's film.
We should keep a book on what the next releases name will be.
Lots of people will get to hear 'Lindows' as a result of MS legal action who wouldn't have normally.
As they say, all publicity is good publicity.
I wonder what Michael's next trick will be.
Let me see now... (Excuse me if I go a little back in time)
Viagra (Very very popular in US for some reason)
World Wide Web
Penicillin
>> We get about one killer film a year from France and that's about it.
As opposed to 50 shit ones from the US?
>> and the art and music is atrocious
Right - Beatles, Pink Floyd anyone?
You're an arse.
Point is they will be able to form more than a anonymous relationship with you. Once they have your credit card then it becomes a lot more easy for them to 'Offer premium' services you cannot live without. Sam kinda reason people offer free trials.
>> I'm going to create several hotmail accounts, send hundreds of e-mails between them, and then reject them as "spam". And there is maybe the true story. If you have MicroPayments and you use a Hotmail account, you will have to give his Billness your credit card details. He'll love that.
Talking call centers which I know a bit about, it always seems to be the case that the lower you pay someone the more control the employer wants over them.
A sense of national consciousness that exalts one nation above all others; one of the most divisive and destructive forces in history.
And your point is???
All that shit about freedom fries and 'cheese eating surrender monkeys' was the worst I've seen recently - it's just another form of racism.
Grow up people. We're all from the same planet.
I think SCO are asking for things their not entitled to uder their agreement with these people. I suggest they reply with the following: Dear SCO We confirm we are in full compliance with our contractual obligations to you as a UNIX licensor. Regards
Genie, bottle, flogging dead horse
I've gone from maybe 10 spams a week to over 140 a day in the last year. It's a joke! I only get 5 or 6 real emails a day. I don't care what new geek ideas get invented, RFC's published or laws get passed. The ONLY way to stop this cancer is to make sending an email COST. FULL STOP. My la-la ears are on until you all agree with me ;)
I think people see three problems with Nuclear power generation. 1. It might blow up or some similar disaster. This is what this type of reactor is designed to eliminate. 2. During its operation, it may pollute the environment with radioactive waste. This is IMHO the unanswered question. 3. Decommissioning and storage of Nuclear waste is unattractive. I think this is an easy one. We already have places on earth that are so horribly polluted that adding more would have no detrimental effect on the environment - just put it a mile below the surface. Take a look at http://www.ga.gov.au/oracle/nukexp_query.html for possible sites. (America is lucky enough to have some very good sites indeed ;)
Wise up people - we all like our homes to be warm, our nice large cars and our industry that produce the goods we buy - it all takes energy.
The ONLY reason we don't have more Nuclear energy is that we have sufficient fossil fuels (currently) for our needs. Just watch what happens when this starts to run out - then we'll see how serious people are with not wanting this type of energy.
LOL - What you say is true. But I think we're talking more of the theoretical implications of extending this kind of licence outside of the S/W world.
>> if they make MORE money as a result
Then it will be because people like their product so much that they are prepared to put up with the licence in return for its benefit.
Either way, the market will determine if this 'product' has value. It's the capitalist way.
>> You couldn't sell a product - for instance - with a label saying "this product may break without warning after only a few days.
That's because there are laws governing your rights when a company sell you a product.
And I would guess (IANAL) that sililar laws govern sales of licences.
We're not going back to the laws of the wild west here - people cannot sign away consumer rights using a contract - well, they can put whatever they want in them but they don;t trump consumer laws.
I really to think that these kind of things are best governed by the free market. Use your wallet, tell your friends.
Don't buy it if you don't like the conditions. Oh, and tell your friends not to as well.
This is a complete non event for me. Who cares?
I wasn't commenting on the relationships artists have with their agents. I do 'get' the internet. If someone wants to publish their works via the internet then the're free to do so. Its their choice.
BUT, and here is the big one, if an artist chooses, for whatever reason, not to then that is not a green light for every tealeaf to nick their work.
>>Digital production and the internet levels the playing field for ALL ARTISTS!
If you mean that every artist can look forward to no reward for their work, I would have to agree with you.
>>How can a simple author possibly make a living just with his pen?
Two words: Harry Potter (well, her pen)
Please people, don't get too excited. This technology has been around for many years in different forms. RPC, DCOM, etc. It's nothing new really, just the same ideas dressed slightly differently.
I disagree.
If we use your logic, then it would be totally OK for someone to work for 10 years on a book only to sell one copy to a thief who copy's it and posts it for everyone on the internet to read.
So the author receives one payment of $10 for his 10 years work.
Maybe you disagree? Maybe in this case it would not be fair? Who decides whose work should be protected and who's shouldn't?
Unless we protect the rights of artists to profit from their works then we, the general public, will suffer with no works published at all.