This article overrates what is going to happen with the semantic web.
Firstly, it relies on people being honest, probably relies on people thinking likewise (what happens about two sites, one saying "evolution is fact" and another saying "evolution is lies").
I can see the semantic web as being a very much in the future thing, or working for small networks/intranets, but not for the internet where thousands of viagra/mortgage/bank loan spammers are trying to get you to their site.
What will really win on the web will be sites that trade on "human connectivity" because they create a sense of lock-in. People sell on Ebay because that's where the buyers are. People buy on Ebay because that's where the sellers are. Personally, I think Ebay is probably more powerful than Amazon which relies solely on reputation.
It's a little like the question of finding out how to do something in an unfamiliar programming language. From a previous language, you know that the command to find part of a string is "MID", so search for "MID" in articles about your language. And it finds nothing, because the command is "STRINGPART" instead of "MID".
In the end, I find the answers by either browsing a book, or just hitting articles with words like what I'm looking for, or most commonly, posting a message on a newsgroup.
The problem is being able to say "what is the function for returning part of a string based on start position and length in..."
I and plenty of other people have said it before. There are lots of reasons why the way is down for Microsoft:-
Everything NOT related to the PC has either failed or done badly. They can't seem to grow outside of where they are.
Ownership of PCs has basically maxed out. That growth in the 90s is never going to be repeated.
The PC software does everything people want it to, feature wise. How many users can name the differences between Office 97 and Office XP. Therefore, less upgrades.
Alternative methods of delivering content (eg phones, PDAs) are growing. That's more people having an opportunity to do what they need without an upgrade.
The internet will deliver more functionality to people without software (just a browser). So, less upgrade possibility.
Linux/Open Office software attacking their existing markets.
Microsoft will undoubtedly be able to sell products, but it's going the same way of things like telephone services - software is going to be a commodity and very soon.
Remember also, the MSFT share price has a big P/E ratio. People don't buy them for the dividends, but for the growth, and to give a good return, that's got to keep going at quite a rate. Once that stops, people will want dividends, which may mean investors waking up to the big cash pile.
The more the squeeze is put on Microsoft, the less the share price goes up, and the more chance that shareholders will demand more of that cash pile at Microsoft.
And yes, any story that basically says "large corporation A pushed a Linux threat on Microsoft" is another "Linux isn't a toy" message. And that is still one of the three big challenges along with applications and drivers to Linux acceptance (frankly, building an app that won't work x-platform now seems a bit short sighted).
Wasn't there also some mishandling of evidence or something?
SCO really have nothing. I've read a lot of the court documents and there's nothing. The way they're going, they'll be lucky to get past discovery, let alone win the case.
Although a trial case might just be the best thing to happen to Linux.
One interesting price difference is the thing where people "round to easy number" (I'm sure there's a proper term in economics for it).
What I mean is that if a product sells in the US for $99, it's not because someone has determined a price and a margin and it happens to reach $99. It's because numbers like 49 and 99 are easy numbers. I imagine that DVD player sales went up dramatically when they dropped from $129 to $99.
Someone probably calculates the product+margin and then takes the nearest "easy number" as the price. What this can also mean is that in international markets, a $100 DVD Player becomes a £100 DVD player and a 100EUR DVD Player. All different prices but giving the same message.
There's an interesting thing about branded supermarket goods. Someone in the UK found that lower earners bought more of them than higher earners, who would settle for a shops own brand.
The reason? People on low income can't afford to by Mercedes or BMWs, but at least they can reach the pinnacle in cola or corn flakes.
Branding is all about emotion. People want to own a Mercedes or a BMW, even though Toyotas are a much better deal. It's partly that the price is out of reach, and that the car defines that you've joined the club. Accepting yourself instead of being defined by your possessions puts a lot of money in the bank.
The internet is really the consumers friend in this issue. I bought a lite-on because I read a good review. Then, I went off into newsgroups etc and started reading and posting. Overall the feedback was good, so I took a chance.
I think there's also three factors in these government contracts (and I'm not defending MS).
If you buy MS software, you are exporting some of your expenditure. Use OSS, and nearly all the spending can be made on local consultancy firms.
Governments like to have control over their data in many ways.
Governments don't have to worry about file formats. They don't bid for contracts from people. They are always the buyer, and therefore can dictate the formats. This could be important. In future, government departments may start saying to companies that they want contracts in Open Office format.
But the whole thing I see is raising interoperability using MS standards. You can't move off Windows if you want MS Office, so you keep buying Windows and everything else Microsoft.
Then there's the whole "this functionality doesn't work with old versions". So, to use product x fully you have to upgrade product y as well.
I can't stand the whole rewriting the world on Windows every so often. I even noticed something about file sorting on XP today that I swear was different on previous versions. I didn't ask MS to change it, and yet they have.
I worked for a decade on COBOL on mainframe and by the end of it, my coding was just natural. I hardly had to think about how to do it, just do it. I didn't need an MSDN to look something up, because it never changed (or if it did, it was incremental).
Sometimes, people should consider the cost of the change process over the perceived benefits.
When it comes to court cases, you are better off being armed. If everyone who used OSS at home gave $5 to the FSF or EFF, how much would they have? And the next time that someone big tries to hit someone, they hit right back, what kind of message would that send?
Most people will bleat about protecting their freedoms, but they won't help to pay to defend them.
To any/.ers reading... next time you think about buying a case mod, or a new DVD or something really trivial, give some money to something worthwhile like the FSF, the EFF or an open source project. If you ask a question on a forum and someone helps you, slip the project a few bucks. It's probably saved you a lot more than that. Pay for the lawyers who will defend your rights in future.
Sadly, the government won't do this for various reasons, so we have to do it ourselves.
It's why people deserve patents for things like the biro, the paper clip and others, and not for most software/business process things.
To me, those inventions were about applying a non-direct approach to a problem. Software patents are about getting something down before someone else does.
Unions have largely been wiped out by legislation and transportation. Mostly the second.
People no longer have the mill in the town that they get on their bike to go to. They can get in a car and drive up to 30 miles to another employer. Freedom of choice has changed the rules.
Age of workforce is going to become a serious issue in the west in about 20 years.
People in retirement will become a major force. These are people who don't have to work but have a right to vote. Pensioners rights groups are going to get quite powerful, and start to demand more state pensions/aid from the decreasing percentage of earners.
Then, I think we could see a major brain drain to places like India and Vietnam.
It's a stupid approach to improving things, a bit like the UK government spending millions on "inward investment" instead of on real training and education. Spend millions on getting some company to move into South Wales, but keep adding regulation to small businesses (which are the future and lifeblood of an economy).
A lot of companies just want to set up manufacturing plants and keep Head Office somewhere else. Then, the moment you get too expensive, they'll be out of there. The result will be unemployed people without transferrable skills.
Slashdot Mirror
Firstly, it relies on people being honest, probably relies on people thinking likewise (what happens about two sites, one saying "evolution is fact" and another saying "evolution is lies").
I can see the semantic web as being a very much in the future thing, or working for small networks/intranets, but not for the internet where thousands of viagra/mortgage/bank loan spammers are trying to get you to their site.
What will really win on the web will be sites that trade on "human connectivity" because they create a sense of lock-in. People sell on Ebay because that's where the buyers are. People buy on Ebay because that's where the sellers are. Personally, I think Ebay is probably more powerful than Amazon which relies solely on reputation.
In the end, I find the answers by either browsing a book, or just hitting articles with words like what I'm looking for, or most commonly, posting a message on a newsgroup.
The problem is being able to say "what is the function for returning part of a string based on start position and length in ..."
Everything NOT related to the PC has either failed or done badly. They can't seem to grow outside of where they are.
Ownership of PCs has basically maxed out. That growth in the 90s is never going to be repeated.
The PC software does everything people want it to, feature wise. How many users can name the differences between Office 97 and Office XP. Therefore, less upgrades.
Alternative methods of delivering content (eg phones, PDAs) are growing. That's more people having an opportunity to do what they need without an upgrade.
The internet will deliver more functionality to people without software (just a browser). So, less upgrade possibility.
Linux/Open Office software attacking their existing markets.
Microsoft will undoubtedly be able to sell products, but it's going the same way of things like telephone services - software is going to be a commodity and very soon.
Remember also, the MSFT share price has a big P/E ratio. People don't buy them for the dividends, but for the growth, and to give a good return, that's got to keep going at quite a rate. Once that stops, people will want dividends, which may mean investors waking up to the big cash pile.
And yes, any story that basically says "large corporation A pushed a Linux threat on Microsoft" is another "Linux isn't a toy" message. And that is still one of the three big challenges along with applications and drivers to Linux acceptance (frankly, building an app that won't work x-platform now seems a bit short sighted).
It's time to apply some real effort.
Would google object if pieces of shareware tried to convince users to switch their home page to www.google.com?
And don't underestimate the power of geeks "fixing" people's PCs to switch the home page to Google or Yahoo.
Market share is basically at max, the home pages can only go down.
SCO's certainly got plenty of organic fertilizer for it.
Maybe there should be a clause in the GPL about "disrespecting the GPL license results in your rights to use GPL software being removed".
SCO really have nothing. I've read a lot of the court documents and there's nothing. The way they're going, they'll be lucky to get past discovery, let alone win the case.
Although a trial case might just be the best thing to happen to Linux.
What I mean is that if a product sells in the US for $99, it's not because someone has determined a price and a margin and it happens to reach $99. It's because numbers like 49 and 99 are easy numbers. I imagine that DVD player sales went up dramatically when they dropped from $129 to $99.
Someone probably calculates the product+margin and then takes the nearest "easy number" as the price. What this can also mean is that in international markets, a $100 DVD Player becomes a £100 DVD player and a 100EUR DVD Player. All different prices but giving the same message.
Are Camry's exactly the same, or are things like the trim different? Not that trim is much of a factor to me, but just curious.
The reason? People on low income can't afford to by Mercedes or BMWs, but at least they can reach the pinnacle in cola or corn flakes.
Branding is all about emotion. People want to own a Mercedes or a BMW, even though Toyotas are a much better deal. It's partly that the price is out of reach, and that the car defines that you've joined the club. Accepting yourself instead of being defined by your possessions puts a lot of money in the bank.
The internet is really the consumers friend in this issue. I bought a lite-on because I read a good review. Then, I went off into newsgroups etc and started reading and posting. Overall the feedback was good, so I took a chance.
Conquer the folding space/warp+ speed issue, and then let's think about sending humans into space.
If you buy MS software, you are exporting some of your expenditure. Use OSS, and nearly all the spending can be made on local consultancy firms.
Governments like to have control over their data in many ways.
Governments don't have to worry about file formats. They don't bid for contracts from people. They are always the buyer, and therefore can dictate the formats. This could be important. In future, government departments may start saying to companies that they want contracts in Open Office format.
Then there's the whole "this functionality doesn't work with old versions". So, to use product x fully you have to upgrade product y as well.
I worked for a decade on COBOL on mainframe and by the end of it, my coding was just natural. I hardly had to think about how to do it, just do it. I didn't need an MSDN to look something up, because it never changed (or if it did, it was incremental).
Sometimes, people should consider the cost of the change process over the perceived benefits.
from the search, will we get those up the popular news list?
Can I suggest www.fark.com has more of the news you are looking for? ;)
When it comes to court cases, you are better off being armed. If everyone who used OSS at home gave $5 to the FSF or EFF, how much would they have? And the next time that someone big tries to hit someone, they hit right back, what kind of message would that send?
Most people will bleat about protecting their freedoms, but they won't help to pay to defend them.
To any /.ers reading... next time you think about buying a case mod, or a new DVD or something really trivial, give some money to something worthwhile like the FSF, the EFF or an open source project. If you ask a question on a forum and someone helps you, slip the project a few bucks. It's probably saved you a lot more than that. Pay for the lawyers who will defend your rights in future.
Sadly, the government won't do this for various reasons, so we have to do it ourselves.
It's why people deserve patents for things like the biro, the paper clip and others, and not for most software/business process things.
To me, those inventions were about applying a non-direct approach to a problem. Software patents are about getting something down before someone else does.
People no longer have the mill in the town that they get on their bike to go to. They can get in a car and drive up to 30 miles to another employer. Freedom of choice has changed the rules.
People in retirement will become a major force. These are people who don't have to work but have a right to vote. Pensioners rights groups are going to get quite powerful, and start to demand more state pensions/aid from the decreasing percentage of earners.
Then, I think we could see a major brain drain to places like India and Vietnam.
A lot of companies just want to set up manufacturing plants and keep Head Office somewhere else. Then, the moment you get too expensive, they'll be out of there. The result will be unemployed people without transferrable skills.