It really is a shame for me, as an American, to see such abuses of power. Ever since the Sep. 11th incidents, the U.S. Government has constructed a pattern of actions - under the guise of protection from terrorists - that creates a much stronger government at the expense of the rights of its citizens.
Oops! You're right! I just got on a roll and made an error...:| I recalled the QDOS thing around the time CP/M was being pushed out of market (I only had rudimentary experience with CP/M, and don't recall much about it). Then there was the competition of the DOSes (DR-DOS, PC-DOS, and MS-DOS were the big ones - there were probably others)...
Now, I don't know if I am old because I remember that stuff, or old because I forgot part of it! LOL
Man, you got a lotta guts coming here and saying that Microsoft is the model we all ought to be following...
To think that there is nothing to learn from Microsoft, and what they have done to become the #1 is a rather big mistake.
While I don't agree with Microsoft's ethics, nor their illegal activities, there are still many other things that they did well. As the article stated (and many things in the article are just common knowledge items, but good discussion starters), a lot of being successful comes from "dumb luck". It was actually cited as being the MOST important factor. Microsoft was in a position to supply a Quick & Dirty Operating System (and even called it QDOS!) when IBM originally was in a business relationship with Microsoft for applicationware. Bill Gates, for all the mostly-deserved ill will sent his way, saw the opportunity for what it was and got Microsoft set up as the OS supplier.
If a business can quickly take advantage of opportunities in a sharp, decisive manor like Microsoft did, then they will have taken advantage of "dumb luck". Luck is 90% random, and 10% how events are reacted to... or something close to that (YMMV);)
Well, if one were considering making something like the Segway, you should probably investigate which patents apply, and make sure you don't use those methods, processes, etc.
For example, they may state a method of a "parallel-wheeled personal transportation device using electro-mechanical gyro feedback fed into a processor for wheel servo balance adjustment" (whew! What a mouthful!). Using different methods would not violate (infringe on?) that patent. Of course, a three-wheeled device using no gyros has already been invented...
The point is that a similar, competing device, could be built on different concepts. Investigate the patents, and devise your own solution.
If you RTFA, you see that the individual contributed to something OUTSIDE of his job at @stake. Unless his editor worked there, too, he wouldn't have him (or her) available to review it.
Well, I suppose the original poster should have stated that the audio was powered by Linux.;)
Plus, if the audio were powered by Windows, then it might very well exclaim a rather loud and annoying "YOU'VE GOT MAIL" the first time somone hit the AOL partner bumper...:P
Darl McBride has filed claims indicating that SCO Unixunaware has IP claims on Binary, Decimal, Hexadecimal, and Dewydecimal. They released the obsufuscated proof: !@#$%^&*()
This proves ownership of the numbers 0-9.
Comments also attributed to Mr. McBride seem to threaten the ancient Romans, as the System V code shows the same history, "copied line-for-line" to the roman numerals I, II, III, IV, V, VI, etc.
Calling Windows "a 50 year old car", and Unix "modern" is backwards. Unix has a much older history than Windows. But, in the software world, this isn't necessarily a disadvantage.
What matters is a history of constant innovation and improvement. Windows does "ok" at this. While Linux (in particular) shows an excellent history of striving to improve and adapt technologies: both new and old.
By comparison, Windows is focused on the new at the expense of the old. That is where Microsoft sees the money -- in their cycle of upgrades (software and hardware assist each other).
Slashdot Mirror
What is this about MS Access? I RTFA, and the only thing I saw was:
Given that the interface appears to be browser-based, this can be migrated to MaxOS, and *nixes if testing goes well.
However, there was one disconcerting item on the serveusa.gov FAQs. This item:
And that is what scares ME!It really is a shame for me, as an American, to see such abuses of power. Ever since the Sep. 11th incidents, the U.S. Government has constructed a pattern of actions - under the guise of protection from terrorists - that creates a much stronger government at the expense of the rights of its citizens.
Oops! You're right! I just got on a roll and made an error... :| I recalled the QDOS thing around the time CP/M was being pushed out of market (I only had rudimentary experience with CP/M, and don't recall much about it). Then there was the competition of the DOSes (DR-DOS, PC-DOS, and MS-DOS were the big ones - there were probably others)...
Now, I don't know if I am old because I remember that stuff, or old because I forgot part of it! LOL
To think that there is nothing to learn from Microsoft, and what they have done to become the #1 is a rather big mistake.
While I don't agree with Microsoft's ethics, nor their illegal activities, there are still many other things that they did well. As the article stated (and many things in the article are just common knowledge items, but good discussion starters), a lot of being successful comes from "dumb luck". It was actually cited as being the MOST important factor. Microsoft was in a position to supply a Quick & Dirty Operating System (and even called it QDOS!) when IBM originally was in a business relationship with Microsoft for applicationware. Bill Gates, for all the mostly-deserved ill will sent his way, saw the opportunity for what it was and got Microsoft set up as the OS supplier.
If a business can quickly take advantage of opportunities in a sharp, decisive manor like Microsoft did, then they will have taken advantage of "dumb luck". Luck is 90% random, and 10% how events are reacted to... or something close to that (YMMV) ;)
Well, if one were considering making something like the Segway, you should probably investigate which patents apply, and make sure you don't use those methods, processes, etc.
For example, they may state a method of a "parallel-wheeled personal transportation device using electro-mechanical gyro feedback fed into a processor for wheel servo balance adjustment" (whew! What a mouthful!). Using different methods would not violate (infringe on?) that patent. Of course, a three-wheeled device using no gyros has already been invented...
The point is that a similar, competing device, could be built on different concepts. Investigate the patents, and devise your own solution.
If you RTFA, you see that the individual contributed to something OUTSIDE of his job at @stake. Unless his editor worked there, too, he wouldn't have him (or her) available to review it.
I would have to guess it would be a PLC, much like an Allen-Bradly, or a GEFanuc. Maybe if *I* RTFA, I would find the answer is there, but I didn't...
:(
TILT
Well, I suppose the original poster should have stated that the audio was powered by Linux. ;)
Plus, if the audio were powered by Windows, then it might very well exclaim a rather loud and annoying "YOU'VE GOT MAIL" the first time somone hit the AOL partner bumper... :P
Darl McBride has filed claims indicating that SCO Unixunaware has IP claims on Binary, Decimal, Hexadecimal, and Dewydecimal.
They released the obsufuscated proof: !@#$%^&*()
This proves ownership of the numbers 0-9.
Comments also attributed to Mr. McBride seem to threaten the ancient Romans, as the System V code shows the same history, "copied line-for-line" to the roman numerals I, II, III, IV, V, VI, etc.
Ummm... Your "true conclusion" is a *bit* flawed.
Calling Windows "a 50 year old car", and Unix "modern" is backwards. Unix has a much older history than Windows. But, in the software world, this isn't necessarily a disadvantage.
What matters is a history of constant innovation and improvement. Windows does "ok" at this. While Linux (in particular) shows an excellent history of striving to improve and adapt technologies: both new and old.
By comparison, Windows is focused on the new at the expense of the old. That is where Microsoft sees the money -- in their cycle of upgrades (software and hardware assist each other).
Just my two cents.