Didn't OOo do this kind of thing first with their XML filetypes? MS filed this in June 2002 in NZ, so surely OpenOffice.org has precent for a "Word-processing document stored in a single XML file that may be manipulated by applications that understand XML" maybe sans the "single file" part, which would have to be an obvious follow on?
WTF are they doing patenting this shit in NZ? NZCS, where are you guys on this?
And anyway, didn't OpenOffice.org use an XML fileformat before the MicroSoft clown did?
I'm not sure about that. Motorcycle dealers have been doing it for years with bikes from Japan.
Technically, the CDs are private imports anyways, so even if commercial importing for sale was illegal private imports should be fine.
Yeh, there was a big of drama over the parallel importing thing. Had to be done though, as the little monopolies folks had built up were fleecing us something chronic. Even now it's still pretty bad...
What's to fight out? There's nothing wrong with parallel importing. The worst the Evil Empire could do is threaten to stop supplying them in Hong Kong.
Funnily enough, that's exactly what happened here in New Zealand with DVDs and independant DVD rental outlets...
Air-o-gel sounds more appropriate. When they swap 99.8% Air with with a 99.9999% vaccum THEN I'll be impressed. Except they are doing that already, and I am indeed impressed with the results.
The extremely high R values being quoted are possibly the result of using evacuated Aerogel in panels or other sealed structures.
Where are the Australian Computer Society on all this? Surely a company like SCO is a member of this group, and given that they have been acting unprofessionally (at best) I'd have thought they'd be having words as well. Why is up to Linux supporting companies to handle this alone?
Don't like ads? Use an Ad-blocker like I do. Seems reasonable until you look at it from this from a not-to-distant-future perspective:
Web content is copyrighted, and by viewing that page you are making a copy from the webserver to your browser. So, the publisher could stipulate under the "site usage" (license) that you may not alter the content, therefore prohibiting adblocking. Better yet, encrypt most of the content and decrypt via a trivial JavaScript or similar method to invoke some additional legal bullshit as well.
So let's say this happens and you run an ad-blocker. How do they tell? Just diff the timestamped IP request logs and go chasing from there. Through in a few high-profile example cases and you're good to go.
On top of that, software like ad-blockers would be copyright infringement devices, having no "legal" use, and would be banned outright.
You'll note that fair-use isn't mentioned, because I'm assuming that courts will have decided that the content providers need revenue from adverts to survive, so it's not "fair use" to filter them.
It's just like cyberspace, only with more politicians. And pretty soon, governments are going to address this imbalance.
Open chat rooms and such will be classified as public places. They'll be subject to the same laws and regulations, eg no hate-speach, etc. That's not such a bad thing, but don't be suprised to have police bots monitoring public chats an forums.
They'll be regulated (most likely) by the location of "the service provider" although quite how that will impact P2P I'm not sure. I expect that will follow international telecoms precidents.
I think we've had our fun, and it's back to the real world pretty soon - even when we're online.
Not all of them? There's an understatement. Dude that photoshoot is my motivation to get to the gym today. No way do I wanna be looking like those fellas.
Depends who you are selling to. If it's a generic company selling share to the public and speculators to raise capital for... who-knows-what, then yeh it's not a good idea.
On the other hand, if Carmack said he was selling shares in his aerospace company because he needs 100 million to get an orbiter up and back, then you can safely sign me and a whole bunch of other geeks up. Think of it as PayPal with something in return.
That would be cool as all heck, but if Apple was smart they'd have dibs on the G5 laptop market. It'll be written into an agreement somewhere.
Besides, IBM did flirt with PPC notebooks years ago but gave it up. I doubt they'll return, unless it's to equip their employees when they've ditched Windows completely.
Your post highlights the irony of the markets nicely. We all know it's crap, but we'll buy and build up the price anyway - then sell just before we "know" it will crash, causing a crash.:-) Gotta love self-fulfilling prophecies.
Ok, their rates are fixed for a year. But without a promised lifetime I'm no better off - there's nothing to stop them pulling a RedHat after 1 year 3 months. If you can show me where they say they'll support it for X years, I'll take another look at them.
The computer industry is global. Also, let's not forget that German courts have already told them to STFU. I think it's fair to say their name is mud everywhere.
When they offer more than 1 year of support then I'll be interested. 2 is the minimum I'd consider paying for, anything less is just procrastination. I might as well switch to Debian if that's the best they can offer.
Slashdot Mirror
Use proper W3C XML or OOo filetypes...
Didn't OOo do this kind of thing first with their XML filetypes? MS filed this in June 2002 in NZ, so surely OpenOffice.org has precent for a "Word-processing document stored in a single XML file that may be manipulated by applications that understand XML" maybe sans the "single file" part, which would have to be an obvious follow on?
BTW, more info is on the NZ Open Source Software portal.
WTF are they doing patenting this shit in NZ? NZCS, where are you guys on this? And anyway, didn't OpenOffice.org use an XML fileformat before the MicroSoft clown did?
Marketing.
I'm not sure about that. Motorcycle dealers have been doing it for years with bikes from Japan.
Technically, the CDs are private imports anyways, so even if commercial importing for sale was illegal private imports should be fine.
Yeh, there was a big of drama over the parallel importing thing. Had to be done though, as the little monopolies folks had built up were fleecing us something chronic. Even now it's still pretty bad...
What's to fight out? There's nothing wrong with parallel importing. The worst the Evil Empire could do is threaten to stop supplying them in Hong Kong.
Funnily enough, that's exactly what happened here in New Zealand with DVDs and independant DVD rental outlets...
Dude, your friend is hot. And smart.
Air-o-gel sounds more appropriate. When they swap 99.8% Air with with a 99.9999% vaccum THEN I'll be impressed. Except they are doing that already, and I am indeed impressed with the results.
The extremely high R values being quoted are possibly the result of using evacuated Aerogel in panels or other sealed structures.
Where are the Australian Computer Society on all this? Surely a company like SCO is a member of this group, and given that they have been acting unprofessionally (at best) I'd have thought they'd be having words as well. Why is up to Linux supporting companies to handle this alone?
You should try a different bakery.
Have you got a link to a sample?
Ok, how about this...
Don't like ads? Use an Ad-blocker like I do. Seems reasonable until you look at it from this from a not-to-distant-future perspective:
Web content is copyrighted, and by viewing that page you are making a copy from the webserver to your browser. So, the publisher could stipulate under the "site usage" (license) that you may not alter the content, therefore prohibiting adblocking. Better yet, encrypt most of the content and decrypt via a trivial JavaScript or similar method to invoke some additional legal bullshit as well.
So let's say this happens and you run an ad-blocker. How do they tell? Just diff the timestamped IP request logs and go chasing from there. Through in a few high-profile example cases and you're good to go.
On top of that, software like ad-blockers would be copyright infringement devices, having no "legal" use, and would be banned outright.
You'll note that fair-use isn't mentioned, because I'm assuming that courts will have decided that the content providers need revenue from adverts to survive, so it's not "fair use" to filter them.
Scary enough for you?
It's a start...
Sounds to me like women are getting ripped off buying tech.
It's just like cyberspace, only with more politicians. And pretty soon, governments are going to address this imbalance.
Open chat rooms and such will be classified as public places. They'll be subject to the same laws and regulations, eg no hate-speach, etc. That's not such a bad thing, but don't be suprised to have police bots monitoring public chats an forums.
They'll be regulated (most likely) by the location of "the service provider" although quite how that will impact P2P I'm not sure. I expect that will follow international telecoms precidents.
I think we've had our fun, and it's back to the real world pretty soon - even when we're online.
Not all of them? There's an understatement. Dude that photoshoot is my motivation to get to the gym today. No way do I wanna be looking like those fellas.
Depends who you are selling to. If it's a generic company selling share to the public and speculators to raise capital for... who-knows-what, then yeh it's not a good idea.
On the other hand, if Carmack said he was selling shares in his aerospace company because he needs 100 million to get an orbiter up and back, then you can safely sign me and a whole bunch of other geeks up. Think of it as PayPal with something in return.
If they want my money they can sell shares, just like other companies do.
Hmmm. An Orion/Archangle mission to Mars. Now THAT is something I'd chip in for...
That would be cool as all heck, but if Apple was smart they'd have dibs on the G5 laptop market. It'll be written into an agreement somewhere.
Besides, IBM did flirt with PPC notebooks years ago but gave it up. I doubt they'll return, unless it's to equip their employees when they've ditched Windows completely.
It appears so...
:-) Gotta love self-fulfilling prophecies.
Your post highlights the irony of the markets nicely. We all know it's crap, but we'll buy and build up the price anyway - then sell just before we "know" it will crash, causing a crash.
Ok, their rates are fixed for a year. But without a promised lifetime I'm no better off - there's nothing to stop them pulling a RedHat after 1 year 3 months. If you can show me where they say they'll support it for X years, I'll take another look at them.
The computer industry is global. Also, let's not forget that German courts have already told them to STFU. I think it's fair to say their name is mud everywhere.
When they offer more than 1 year of support then I'll be interested. 2 is the minimum I'd consider paying for, anything less is just procrastination. I might as well switch to Debian if that's the best they can offer.
Well, unless you stretch the graph out to 1 year, they look like they're doing ok. For the average clueless speculator, they probably look alright...
Nope. They'll be remembered as "The guys that used the nuke."