Honest question here: Could you elaborate more on the grasing animals theory?
Having worked with cows and horses a good part of my life, I can only think of one grazing animal that will eat plantlife down to it's roots.. the goat (no..... no goatse jokes).
"This establishment reserves the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason."
That holds legal water in Texas. I can toss you out of my store just because I don't like the way you look. It might not be good for business if you misuse that ability, but it's legal.
If you have a grand design in mind for a site/store, you get to decide who uses it. If you don't like it, don't use the site/store. Set your own up.
The problem with the fakesters is they're ruining "business" for this site. People see enough fake profiles and they lose faith in the site. I'll probably get modded "Troll" but I think it's kind of rotten that the fakesters, in the name of humor, and hiding behind a misuse of "Freedom of Speech", are chasing away valid customers.
It wasn't the web connection at this company that lead to our infection. Two weeks ago our genius security team patches all of the servers. This past weekend, one person brought their laptop home and, upon returning, infected most of the desktops.
Does anyone remember the Maginot Line? It wasn't necessarily bad systems that brought us to a 4 hour halt, as the patches have been available for two weeks. It was system admins who disabled WindowsUpdate on the "standard desktop" then didn't bother to patch the desktops here... knowing we have MANY laptop users.
Come on... this is/. Psycho ex-girlfriends? That would require getting away from the computer and getting out into the public. Actually talking to women... and stuff.
Probably the most logical comment I've read so far. It seems it would take all the fun out of it for those that are actually playing the game for fun in the first place.
That being said, I've seen a comment or two about some so-far-obscure games that are allowing this. Those ought to be the playground for people who want the relation between real money and monopoly money to be a static one.
There is a company in Houston called Universal Computer Systems that has built their IT model on training in C++. They write automotive service software, and love to hire people with a developer's mind, wether they have C++ experience or not.
Of course, they start novices off around $30k, but if you're a JD, you probably shouldn't get much more than that.
Admittedly, I've never worked there, but have worked with devs who got their start there.
To tie it all together, and not be offtopic, there are still a few companies that will train you, wether it be mainframes, pcs, etc.. Unfortunately, in an economy like this one, employers get to make all the rules, and demanding prior experience is the norm right now.
A buddy of mine who is a published author once told me that publishers demand a thick book that "advertises itself" on the bookshelf. Many "fluffy" chapters are added for that reason, much to the dismay of the original author(s).
If MS is not stopped in some way, then in about 10 years time, you will be required to pay MS in one form or another to have ANY interaction with a computer system.
That's the kicker. Although I'm sure you exagerated to make a point, but the above comment is just not possible. What other industry that was dominated in the US by one company has ever made it impossible to use their (or any other like) wares without a fee? Oil? No. You could feasibly drill your own oil and refine it. Steel? No again. Railroad? Nope.
What guru gets into a business that is doomed to failure? "Hmmm, I think I'll start a company that resells tap water. Oops, we're not making any money. I know, we'll sue the public water works because they've got a monopoly on water distribution."
The capitalist market works quite well if you make something that's better for the public as a whole. Linux still loses because admin'ing it isn't easy for the general user who has a computer for e-mail, web browsing, and writing letters. Apple failed (among other reasons) because their hardware was overpriced. MS found a business model that worked, and an OS that was fine with the general user.
If you don't like it, make something better in the eyes of the money-spending public. Even if it's free, it can be accepted as long as it's feature full and easy to use.
And regarding the "soon, to watch or listen to any media" comment, that will never happen either. There are plenty of formats that didn't come from or get purchased by MS. Who really uses WMA anyway? And anyone who writes an intERnet website with ActiveX documents or some other proprietary MS objects isn't blocking out non MS OS/browser users, but is merely limiting their site to the number of hits (sales) they're going to recieve.
Because my current contract is at an all MS shop (which is not always the case for me) I can use some of the built in tools that make it easier such as ASP, ActiveX docs/controls, etc... Otherwise, I'd take longer to develop apps. So no complaint out of me.
I still say it's a problem of education, rather than forced compliance to open standards. Ford could probably design a radio that only played Ford compliant stations, but the population of auto buyers is educated enough about public radio to avoid buying such a radio.
If you have an online station that won't play through WMP, the you place information on the site about what users could download to retain the ability to play your station.
The cd player that came with my Chevrolet pickup did not play MP3's, and did not play some of my burned cd's. So I bought an aftermarket cd player that did play them. There was a proprietary GM wiring harness, and I had to spend an extra $13 for a connector from the radio to match that harness.
I don't think, however, GM should be brought into court for that. IE is bloatware, and most techies know that. But, it works, and users that don't know much about it still use it, and low and behold, websites appear. If there were no browsers that were preinstalled with Windows OS's, I'd argue that a great many users would be lost. What would they do to get to a site where they could download Opera? Would they have to pay for it at Best Buy, even though it's free? Then who goes to court?
Yeah, I still have many problems with MS's business practices. But in reality, they're a business, whose purpose is to make money, not give opportunity to competitors. Of course, we have laws governing that opportunity, and they eventually breached those laws.
I'll say this about MS though. They treat developers pretty well. I don't like the MFC, but it sure makes C++ RAD a reality. C# takes that a step further. I wonder, though, why they never shipped hte VB runtime, and now the.Net framework, as part of the OS install in the first place.
I do have to say that's the most compelling arguement I've heard in some time. I've gotten by without MS's undocumented API, mostly through C++ and building some fairly tricky functions though. The API would have made the code much faster I'm sure, but it still worked, and a few MS vs. 200 MS isn't much to a user.
The one thing I wanted to see out of the DOJ gig was MS releasing the docs on the API. I never saw the "as long as the client pays $10k for it" coming though. Having seen it, I'm not really impressed with what was "missing" from the API before, though.
Are you a C coder? Have you come across any windows messages coming through with some funky undoc'ed calls?
When I installed Win2k, Media Player was there.. sure. It didn't cost any more than had I unchecked it on the install.
So, again, using that logic, you should be able to buy a Ford with a cheap radio and replace it with whatever you want to... aftermarket. Which you can. You should also be able to buy one with no radio, which you can. But you can't buy one with a pre-installed Toyota radio.
Remind me how this is different from buying Win2k, and unchecking the WMP during install?
Have you read up on the now released (of course with a catch) API? There were calls like AddMRUData, PathBuildRoot, ILCloneFirst, etc... Not many (if any at all) that let you do more with windows that you couldn't do on your own. Plus, FAT and NTFS are documented pretty well, and windows can be drawn without the MFC, so what is it that can be done with the [previously] undocumented API that couldn't be done without it?
It kind of reminds me of the JVM arguement/lawsuit between MS and Sun. Sun writes a JVM and demands it's distributed with Windows. I've never seen any lawsuits where Toyota demanded Ford installed Toyota radios in their trucks because Ford was illegally only using Ford (Bose) radios.
Well sure, there's Yeah Write and many others. But the reason MS outsells this and Word* is it's actually better i.e. more features. The only real competitor I know of is OpenOffice, which sells at an incalculable difference (can't/0). So MS uses the same pricing model in some (but not all) instances, and they get grief?
Glad you got what I meant. I re-read my comment and was worried it sounded like I wholly defent MS's business practices, which I don't. But if someone is going to complain about MS's practices, they shouldn't be based on their claim to an ability to use the same practices.
Let me get this straight... you want MS to stop giving away bundled software for free so competitors (many of whom are free..i.e.Open Office) can compete? Where's the logic in that one?
Slashdot Mirror
You're probably right, in that there's some discriminatory crossover there, but if you don't give a reason, then it's not really discrimination.
Or you could just get a CDX subscription and get the singles before they're played on the radio stations.
Honest question here: Could you elaborate more on the grasing animals theory?
Having worked with cows and horses a good part of my life, I can only think of one grazing animal that will eat plantlife down to it's roots.. the goat (no..... no goatse jokes).
"This establishment reserves the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason."
That holds legal water in Texas. I can toss you out of my store just because I don't like the way you look. It might not be good for business if you misuse that ability, but it's legal.
If you have a grand design in mind for a site/store, you get to decide who uses it. If you don't like it, don't use the site/store. Set your own up.
The problem with the fakesters is they're ruining "business" for this site. People see enough fake profiles and they lose faith in the site. I'll probably get modded "Troll" but I think it's kind of rotten that the fakesters, in the name of humor, and hiding behind a misuse of "Freedom of Speech", are chasing away valid customers.
It wasn't the web connection at this company that lead to our infection. Two weeks ago our genius security team patches all of the servers. This past weekend, one person brought their laptop home and, upon returning, infected most of the desktops.
Does anyone remember the Maginot Line? It wasn't necessarily bad systems that brought us to a 4 hour halt, as the patches have been available for two weeks. It was system admins who disabled WindowsUpdate on the "standard desktop" then didn't bother to patch the desktops here... knowing we have MANY laptop users.
Isaac Asimov already figured it out...
The Last Question
I was writing barcode and wireless apps at DRI in Austin 3 years ago using RFID labels on boxes. They're fairly cheap, and easy to use.
Come on... this is /. Psycho ex-girlfriends? That would require getting away from the computer and getting out into the public. Actually talking to women... and stuff.
:)
Probably the most logical comment I've read so far. It seems it would take all the fun out of it for those that are actually playing the game for fun in the first place.
That being said, I've seen a comment or two about some so-far-obscure games that are allowing this. Those ought to be the playground for people who want the relation between real money and monopoly money to be a static one.
Wouldn't that only apply if she were to hit a Windows network with a Windows virus?
Maybe everyone's corporate policy should be to force users at home to VPN only with a different OS than the company's servers.
Oops.. I RPOTFA, but guess I didn't get down that far. Thanks!
What does this mean for National Semiconductor's analog processing business?
Wow! Don't sugar coat it, tell us how you really feel...
There is a company in Houston called Universal Computer Systems that has built their IT model on training in C++. They write automotive service software, and love to hire people with a developer's mind, wether they have C++ experience or not.
Of course, they start novices off around $30k, but if you're a JD, you probably shouldn't get much more than that.
Admittedly, I've never worked there, but have worked with devs who got their start there.
To tie it all together, and not be offtopic, there are still a few companies that will train you, wether it be mainframes, pcs, etc.. Unfortunately, in an economy like this one, employers get to make all the rules, and demanding prior experience is the norm right now.
A buddy of mine who is a published author once told me that publishers demand a thick book that "advertises itself" on the bookshelf. Many "fluffy" chapters are added for that reason, much to the dismay of the original author(s).
If MS is not stopped in some way, then in about 10 years time, you will be required to pay MS in one form or another to have ANY interaction with a computer system.
That's the kicker. Although I'm sure you exagerated to make a point, but the above comment is just not possible. What other industry that was dominated in the US by one company has ever made it impossible to use their (or any other like) wares without a fee? Oil? No. You could feasibly drill your own oil and refine it. Steel? No again. Railroad? Nope.
What guru gets into a business that is doomed to failure? "Hmmm, I think I'll start a company that resells tap water. Oops, we're not making any money. I know, we'll sue the public water works because they've got a monopoly on water distribution."
The capitalist market works quite well if you make something that's better for the public as a whole. Linux still loses because admin'ing it isn't easy for the general user who has a computer for e-mail, web browsing, and writing letters. Apple failed (among other reasons) because their hardware was overpriced. MS found a business model that worked, and an OS that was fine with the general user.
If you don't like it, make something better in the eyes of the money-spending public. Even if it's free, it can be accepted as long as it's feature full and easy to use.
And regarding the "soon, to watch or listen to any media" comment, that will never happen either. There are plenty of formats that didn't come from or get purchased by MS. Who really uses WMA anyway? And anyone who writes an intERnet website with ActiveX documents or some other proprietary MS objects isn't blocking out non MS OS/browser users, but is merely limiting their site to the number of hits (sales) they're going to recieve.
Because my current contract is at an all MS shop (which is not always the case for me) I can use some of the built in tools that make it easier such as ASP, ActiveX docs/controls, etc... Otherwise, I'd take longer to develop apps. So no complaint out of me.
I still say it's a problem of education, rather than forced compliance to open standards. Ford could probably design a radio that only played Ford compliant stations, but the population of auto buyers is educated enough about public radio to avoid buying such a radio.
If you have an online station that won't play through WMP, the you place information on the site about what users could download to retain the ability to play your station.
The cd player that came with my Chevrolet pickup did not play MP3's, and did not play some of my burned cd's. So I bought an aftermarket cd player that did play them. There was a proprietary GM wiring harness, and I had to spend an extra $13 for a connector from the radio to match that harness.
I don't think, however, GM should be brought into court for that. IE is bloatware, and most techies know that. But, it works, and users that don't know much about it still use it, and low and behold, websites appear. If there were no browsers that were preinstalled with Windows OS's, I'd argue that a great many users would be lost. What would they do to get to a site where they could download Opera? Would they have to pay for it at Best Buy, even though it's free? Then who goes to court?
Yeah, I still have many problems with MS's business practices. But in reality, they're a business, whose purpose is to make money, not give opportunity to competitors. Of course, we have laws governing that opportunity, and they eventually breached those laws.
.Net framework, as part of the OS install in the first place.
I'll say this about MS though. They treat developers pretty well. I don't like the MFC, but it sure makes C++ RAD a reality. C# takes that a step further. I wonder, though, why they never shipped hte VB runtime, and now the
I think the coffee is making me digress a bit...
I do have to say that's the most compelling arguement I've heard in some time. I've gotten by without MS's undocumented API, mostly through C++ and building some fairly tricky functions though. The API would have made the code much faster I'm sure, but it still worked, and a few MS vs. 200 MS isn't much to a user.
The one thing I wanted to see out of the DOJ gig was MS releasing the docs on the API. I never saw the "as long as the client pays $10k for it" coming though. Having seen it, I'm not really impressed with what was "missing" from the API before, though.
Are you a C coder? Have you come across any windows messages coming through with some funky undoc'ed calls?
When I installed Win2k, Media Player was there.. sure. It didn't cost any more than had I unchecked it on the install.
So, again, using that logic, you should be able to buy a Ford with a cheap radio and replace it with whatever you want to... aftermarket. Which you can. You should also be able to buy one with no radio, which you can. But you can't buy one with a pre-installed Toyota radio.
Remind me how this is different from buying Win2k, and unchecking the WMP during install?
Have you read up on the now released (of course with a catch) API? There were calls like AddMRUData, PathBuildRoot, ILCloneFirst, etc... Not many (if any at all) that let you do more with windows that you couldn't do on your own. Plus, FAT and NTFS are documented pretty well, and windows can be drawn without the MFC, so what is it that can be done with the [previously] undocumented API that couldn't be done without it?
It kind of reminds me of the JVM arguement/lawsuit between MS and Sun. Sun writes a JVM and demands it's distributed with Windows. I've never seen any lawsuits where Toyota demanded Ford installed Toyota radios in their trucks because Ford was illegally only using Ford (Bose) radios.
Well sure, there's Yeah Write and many others. But the reason MS outsells this and Word* is it's actually better i.e. more features. The only real competitor I know of is OpenOffice, which sells at an incalculable difference (can't /0). So MS uses the same pricing model in some (but not all) instances, and they get grief?
Glad you got what I meant. I re-read my comment and was worried it sounded like I wholly defent MS's business practices, which I don't. But if someone is going to complain about MS's practices, they shouldn't be based on their claim to an ability to use the same practices.
Let me get this straight... you want MS to stop giving away bundled software for free so competitors (many of whom are free..i.e.Open Office) can compete? Where's the logic in that one?