If you look carefully at the dupe screenshot, you can see that the items are spaced unevenly in the vertical direction. This is obviously a sign of a photoshop job...
Why should a company abandon its business to start on another, apparently less lucrative line, which offers less utility to the company's clients?
I think Microsoft has done something smarter than what Christensen suggests in his book. Why should Microsoft "abandon" its once-and-still-successful business to start a new one when it has enough resources to keep the old one and start 100 more?
Have you heard of:
- XBOX
- Tablet PC
- Windows Media Center
- Windows Mobile
- Smartphone
- Visual Studio
- SQL Server
- Microsoft Games Studios
- Business Management Software
- MSN, MSNBC, MSN Messenger
Not to mention all the stuff Microsoft Research is cooking up with 5 billion in cash.
Of course you can say: none of these businesses are successful, but that's exactly Christensen's point. None of them are at first, but if you don't get into new markets, your company will die.
If what you're saying is true, and Google has a higher percentage of Mozilla/Firefox users than most other sites, what a sad day for Mozilla/Firefox.
Google's June 2004 zeitgeist was the last month to carry the browser statistics. If you measure the pixels, Mozilla has 7 and MSIE 6.0 has 103. That means MSIE 6.0 has almost 15x more market share than Mozilla (90% MSIE 6.0, 6% Mozilla). And from what you're claiming, these results are skewed in favor of Mozilla?
Things may have changed since June 2004 with all of the security breaches and such, but I doubt things have changed as much as the parent article claims.
I just finished reading the essay "Programming as if Performance Mattered", by James Hague. The essay covers how compiler optimization has changed over the years. If you get bored, keep reading; there's a big 'gotcha' in the middle.
Hague begins: "Will performance issues haunt us forever? This essay puts performance analysis in perspective."
With the increased percentage of American jobs going overseas, I am all for anti-plagiarism systems. These systems will make US education worth more. There will be less idiots slipping through the system without doing any work.
Remember, a college education of today is the high school education of yesterday. I am for any system that claims to increase the worth of US college degrees.
But...if the user base starts to dwindle, and in turn the community, how will Joe Shmoe average IT person be able to find answers to his linux questions without paying Red Hat a fortune?
I think the MPAA is totally overacting. How many geeks out there are actually going to substitute a DivX for the cinimatic experience of going to a movie theater?
Personally, I know people who had access to the LOTR DVD screener rip, and downloaded it, but waited to watch it until after the movie came out.
They then proceeded to watch the movie in theaters 3 or 4 times before ever playing the DivX file.
It wasn't until the period between the movie leaving theaters and coming out on DVD that the DivX file came in handy.
These friends not only purchased the regular version DVD when it came out, but also the extended version DVD.
IMO, if the MPAA want's to stop the popularity of DVD Screener rips, they should release the movie in DVD the same week it comes to theaters.
This is exactly what they do. Every 5 minutes or so they flash "THIS DVD IS FOR SCREENING PURPOSES ONLY". It doesn't leave the screen for 30-60 seconds.
When you say "there", how does a speech recognition algorithm choose between outputting "their", "there", or "they're"?
Today's speech recognition algorithms use sentence context to solve the problem. This is similar to Google's search. When you search "flowers", how does the search algorithm know when to output "flowers.com", "free gardening tips", or "50% off when you spend $100 or more on a flower arrangement".
The article doesn't say Google's search algorithm isn't capable of refining search results. It's saying that Google's method is flawed. A perfect search algorithm should return exactly what a person wants, no matter what they type in the search field.
There are so many flaws in your arguments I don't even know where to start.
Well, actually, I'll start right here.
a) You're right, nobody hates free stuff. So why are you pointing out competent people like free software? Morons like free software too.
Also, are you suggesting that virus writers are competent? If so, I completely disagree. Virus writers are just egocentric abused children trying to get as much attention as they can.
b) While Linux machines can be counted in the millions, Desktop Linux machines can't. Please read the latest research before you make blanket statements to help support your arguments.
The last report I read said that Linux currently has less than 1% of the PC desktop market, not 10%.
The fact that there really aren't that many Desktop Linux boxes out there is a fundamental flaw in your argument. It's the reason why all of the apps you listed arenâ(TM)t getting attacked by viruses.
Now to combat your concluding statement:
Where is your proof that free software is more diverse, better quality, and universally loved? The biggest consistent comment on Slashdot pertaining to the proliferation of desktop open source applications is this: there isn't going to be any increased market share until programmers stop simply emulating commercial software apps, and start innovating.
Draw what conclusions you will.
I doubt Microsoft would intentionally break their over version of Java. Of course they want to make Java look bad, but creating holes in their own version would simply cause people to switch to Sun's version.
Slashdot Mirror
Open in Word Select All Hit: Control + Space
If you look carefully at the dupe screenshot, you can see that the items are spaced unevenly in the vertical direction. This is obviously a sign of a photoshop job...
You mean:
I before E except after C and when it has the A sound, as in neighbor and weigh.
In regionwise ratings, Google tops North America...
Actually, the article says Apple tops both North America AND the world. Google comes in second in North America.
Seattle has had self-adapting traffic lights at most major intersections for the last 5-10 years...
Why should a company abandon its business to start on another, apparently less lucrative line, which offers less utility to the company's clients?
I think Microsoft has done something smarter than what Christensen suggests in his book. Why should Microsoft "abandon" its once-and-still-successful business to start a new one when it has enough resources to keep the old one and start 100 more?
Have you heard of:
- XBOX
- Tablet PC
- Windows Media Center
- Windows Mobile
- Smartphone
- Visual Studio
- SQL Server
- Microsoft Games Studios
- Business Management Software
- MSN, MSNBC, MSN Messenger
Not to mention all the stuff Microsoft Research is cooking up with 5 billion in cash.
Of course you can say: none of these businesses are successful, but that's exactly Christensen's point. None of them are at first, but if you don't get into new markets, your company will die.
If what you're saying is true, and Google has a higher percentage of Mozilla/Firefox users than most other sites, what a sad day for Mozilla/Firefox. Google's June 2004 zeitgeist was the last month to carry the browser statistics. If you measure the pixels, Mozilla has 7 and MSIE 6.0 has 103. That means MSIE 6.0 has almost 15x more market share than Mozilla (90% MSIE 6.0, 6% Mozilla). And from what you're claiming, these results are skewed in favor of Mozilla?
Things may have changed since June 2004 with all of the security breaches and such, but I doubt things have changed as much as the parent article claims.
I wonder if international governments and Microsoft will try to make an example out of him?
Maybe give him the death penalty?
this slashdot post would read:
I just finished reading the essay "Programming as if Performance Mattered", by James Hague. The essay covers how compiler optimization has changed over the years. If you get bored, keep reading; there's a big 'gotcha' in the middle. Hague begins: "Will performance issues haunt us forever? This essay puts performance analysis in perspective."
I think this 1997 snapshot proves your statement false!
With the increased percentage of American jobs going overseas, I am all for anti-plagiarism systems. These systems will make US education worth more. There will be less idiots slipping through the system without doing any work.
Remember, a college education of today is the high school education of yesterday. I am for any system that claims to increase the worth of US college degrees.
But...if the user base starts to dwindle, and in turn the community, how will Joe Shmoe average IT person be able to find answers to his linux questions without paying Red Hat a fortune?
I think the MPAA is totally overacting. How many geeks out there are actually going to substitute a DivX for the cinimatic experience of going to a movie theater?
Personally, I know people who had access to the LOTR DVD screener rip, and downloaded it, but waited to watch it until after the movie came out.
They then proceeded to watch the movie in theaters 3 or 4 times before ever playing the DivX file.
It wasn't until the period between the movie leaving theaters and coming out on DVD that the DivX file came in handy.
These friends not only purchased the regular version DVD when it came out, but also the extended version DVD.
IMO, if the MPAA want's to stop the popularity of DVD Screener rips, they should release the movie in DVD the same week it comes to theaters.
This is exactly what they do. Every 5 minutes or so they flash "THIS DVD IS FOR SCREENING PURPOSES ONLY". It doesn't leave the screen for 30-60 seconds.
I'm sure all of you remember the ant infested iBook story.
Hey heXXXen, how long have you been working of the CI Host PR department?
Getting around that kind of worm would be simple...
Microsoft could:
1) Relabel the patch on windows update
2) Update their scanning control to check for actual files instead of registry entries
Both of these things could happen post worm release.
Tooth and nail?
How is voiding GPL and making it illegal to run Linux simply tooth and nail?
SCO is going straight for the Jugular...
When you say "there", how does a speech recognition algorithm choose between outputting "their", "there", or "they're"?
Today's speech recognition algorithms use sentence context to solve the problem. This is similar to Google's search. When you search "flowers", how does the search algorithm know when to output "flowers.com", "free gardening tips", or "50% off when you spend $100 or more on a flower arrangement".
The article doesn't say Google's search algorithm isn't capable of refining search results. It's saying that Google's method is flawed. A perfect search algorithm should return exactly what a person wants, no matter what they type in the search field.
This will be a good test of Apple to see how long it takes them to deploy a fix on Software Update.
Seems everyone is always judging everything by how fast their creators release security fixes!
I want to point the device at a plant and have it readout its name, age, and edability.
There are so many flaws in your arguments I don't even know where to start. Well, actually, I'll start right here. a) You're right, nobody hates free stuff. So why are you pointing out competent people like free software? Morons like free software too. Also, are you suggesting that virus writers are competent? If so, I completely disagree. Virus writers are just egocentric abused children trying to get as much attention as they can. b) While Linux machines can be counted in the millions, Desktop Linux machines can't. Please read the latest research before you make blanket statements to help support your arguments. The last report I read said that Linux currently has less than 1% of the PC desktop market, not 10%. The fact that there really aren't that many Desktop Linux boxes out there is a fundamental flaw in your argument. It's the reason why all of the apps you listed arenâ(TM)t getting attacked by viruses. Now to combat your concluding statement: Where is your proof that free software is more diverse, better quality, and universally loved? The biggest consistent comment on Slashdot pertaining to the proliferation of desktop open source applications is this: there isn't going to be any increased market share until programmers stop simply emulating commercial software apps, and start innovating. Draw what conclusions you will.
I doubt Microsoft would intentionally break their over version of Java. Of course they want to make Java look bad, but creating holes in their own version would simply cause people to switch to Sun's version.