yet another business profiting off of the backs of developers who work for free
Not really as nothing is taken away from anyone. Regardless of the decision of the bank the software would have been there for anyone to use. The fact they chose to use it removes no value from anyone.
Second there is a good chance that the community will get something back "for free" as they will probably have some requirements that will be paid for via internal development or monies given to outside developers.
Thirdly it is very important to understand the requirement of a large commercial institution to improve the distributions for everones benefit.
I Still Don't Get It(tm)
YHBT, is your next posting Yes?
Re:Slashdot Posting Contradicting Articles
on
More on Longhorn
·
· Score: 2
Give the guys a break. It's not that Microsoft is sending out press releases on their internal strategies, Codenames etc. etc.
The way it's done actually functions pretty well as the more informed postings rises to the top. If there is some discrepancy on what really is in the works, it just might be due to discrepancies and strategy disagreements inside MS.
No, I understand that they want to Leech of Microsoft. The point I was trying to make is that Microsoft implicitly accepted that risk when they picked a generic name.
Your point is a valid but different from the point I was trying to make.
Interesting I didn't know that. Kind of a bummer though as I have used the example of KFC in other discussions. That leaves me with Atomic skies as an example of a name once fine that became a liability. Not as good as the Fried in KFC though.
Porche is not a generic name with a well defined meaning.
Any meaning other than a car is as a label. IE a girls name, as is Mercedes by the way.
Porche did not get any benefit form the Commons when they selected this name.
Select a generic well established word and you take the value that that term already has from the Commons. The way you pay that "value" back is through your inability to copyright it.
You knew that other people could use that term when you selected and you have to live with it.
Nullsoft is owned by AOL Time Warner. The likelyhood of them getting a letter is zero, (or close) AOL would probably welcome such a request as they can go to court and most likely invalifdate MS' right to the generic name windows.
The best defense I can think of that I have never seen (Maybe its there just missed it) in any articles let alone legal Briefs on using common names for a product is that the risk of dilution comes with the territory.
This is offset by the initial benefit you get when you chose it. Choose a generic non descript name and your effort to make it stick in peoples mind is MUCH harder than using a descriptive name.
Take the story we had the other day about eVISA. The Credit card organization chose VISA precisely because it was a well known word with a meaning that dovetailed with their positioning idea. IE Something that allows you to go some place with no problem. They got the benefit now live with the drawback.
Now Windows. What the F.... It was chosen because it described exactly what the program was trying to do with a metaphor that everyone understood. They reaped the benefit now they should live with the drawback, or change themselves.
Good initial names that turns on the corporation is common. Take Kentucky Fried Chicken. They now spend millions to get rid of the Fried connotation as they repositions themselves as KFC. Does that mean that using the initial name was foolish? No, They wouldn't have got to where they are without the initial descriptive name.
OS fanatics have been busy yabbering to anyone who'll listen why their utopian communist way
I do not understand why you think that OpenSource is exempted from capitalist market forces. It is precisely the market forces that the OpenSource movement wants put into play and that MS et al is afraid of.
Indeed it does. The beauty of this is that every time a piece of FUD like this arrives, it adds mindshare of OpenSource to the equation.
It's like the old Monty Python sketch when in the cockpit of a plane John Cleese takes the microphone and informs the passenger that "There is no cause for alarm". When asked why he did that claiming the passengers now have to ponder "What is there no cause for alarm For!
This junk by MS almost ensures an invite for OpenSource to the party.
It is easy to forget about prominant business men when focusing on figures like Eichmann or Hoss, but the industrialists who were eager to create factories at Auschwitz were perpetrators of the horror too.
Many prominent German corporations, among them Krupp, Siemens and Bayer, were interested in what might be negotiated. Auschwitz began developing a network of outlying subcamps, thirty-four in all. Soon, the prisoners worked at a cement plant, a coal-mine, a steel factory and a shoe factory.
The biggest of these Auschwitz subcamps was the I.G. Farben plant. The plant was known as Buna because its principal purpose was to produce synthetic rubber; its other main installation was a hydrogenation plant designed to convert coal into oil. The Auschwitz factories were the largest in the Farben empire.
Conditions at Buna were much like those at Auschwitz. The dawn roll calls, the starvation rations, the labor gangs sent out for twelve hours at a time, forced to work at the gas chambers and furnaces, beaten by guards, harried by giant dogs. The prisoners who died of overwork (dozens of them every day) had to be hauled back to camp at nightfall so that they could be propped up and counted at the next morning's roll call.
Ultimately, around 25,000 people were killed during the construction of the I.G. Farben plant.
This would have been a perfectly good answer to the story earlier about likelyhood of OpenSource going mainstream. Why would anyone want OpenSource to do just that.
The point is that both GM and Exxon has 10 times the sales of MS, Makes as much money as MS but their Capitalization (outstanding shares times share price) is 1/3 or so. Look at the various ratios for different industries and you will be surprised.
Oh please oh please relegate me to the status of GM
I were not talking about you, I was talking about Microsoft. Going from Joe's Garage shop to GM status is not too shappy but that was not what the comment was about.
Certainly they seemed very functional, but these engineers all still carried laptops
It's an interesting point but makes little difference. These guys have probably carried laptops for years, as has a lot of other people. The market is flat.
The issue at hand is where the growth is going to be, being the top dog in a stagnant market is fine but MS' valuation is based on growth. If they can't grow they will be relegated to the status of GM or Exxon.
Nothing wrong per se but share prices will be 1/5'th of current.
Oh wait, I can't threaten them with legal action like they can
Why can't you sue them? You can sue anybody for anything. Your case might be thrown out, and you might have to pay for a frivilous suit, but in principle you can sue. You can send them a bill to start with. Go to small claims court to state your case. Chances are they will not show up and you win by default. Then you have a legal claim you can use to attach any assests they might have. Etc. Etc.
I guess what I am trying to say you can harrass them as much as you like.
. . . . . . . The Clinton administration would like the Federal government to have the capability to read any international or domestic computer communications. The FBI wants access to decode, digest, and discuss financial transactions, personal e-mail, and proprietary information sent abroad -- all in the name of national security.
. . . . This proposed policy raises obvious concerns about Americans' privacy, in addition to tampering with the competitive advantage that our U.S. software companies currently enjoy in the field of encryption technology. Not only would Big Brother be looming over the shoulders of international cyber-surfers, but the administration threatens to render our state-of-the-art computer software engineers obsolete and unemployed.
It spread to other countries in addition to US. In Denmark a golden coin worth 2 Kroner was called Daler.
It existed until the 60's. There was a fair amount of Lore around the Daler, notably used at Brothels for depositing payment at a certain part of the girls.
Microsoft = Bad, so stealing their software isn't stealing at all
Read the post again. I didn't make a comment on right or wrong of stealing software from MS. The comment was about my involvement if fixing windows problems for other people.
I do not steal from Microsoft, nor do I do their job for free.
Slashdot Mirror
They better be it's a Bank.
Not really as nothing is taken away from anyone. Regardless of the decision of the bank the software would have been there for anyone to use. The fact they chose to use it removes no value from anyone.
Second there is a good chance that the community will get something back "for free" as they will probably have some requirements that will be paid for via internal development or monies given to outside developers.
Thirdly it is very important to understand the requirement of a large commercial institution to improve the distributions for everones benefit.
I Still Don't Get It(tm)
YHBT, is your next posting Yes?
The way it's done actually functions pretty well as the more informed postings rises to the top. If there is some discrepancy on what really is in the works, it just might be due to discrepancies and strategy disagreements inside MS.
Your point is a valid but different from the point I was trying to make.
Interesting I didn't know that. Kind of a bummer though as I have used the example of KFC in other discussions. That leaves me with Atomic skies as an example of a name once fine that became a liability. Not as good as the Fried in KFC though.
Porche is not a generic name with a well defined meaning. Any meaning other than a car is as a label. IE a girls name, as is Mercedes by the way.
Porche did not get any benefit form the Commons when they selected this name.
Select a generic well established word and you take the value that that term already has from the Commons. The way you pay that "value" back is through your inability to copyright it.
You knew that other people could use that term when you selected and you have to live with it.
Nullsoft is owned by AOL Time Warner. The likelyhood of them getting a letter is zero, (or close) AOL would probably welcome such a request as they can go to court and most likely invalifdate MS' right to the generic name windows.
This is offset by the initial benefit you get when you chose it. Choose a generic non descript name and your effort to make it stick in peoples mind is MUCH harder than using a descriptive name.
Take the story we had the other day about eVISA. The Credit card organization chose VISA precisely because it was a well known word with a meaning that dovetailed with their positioning idea. IE Something that allows you to go some place with no problem. They got the benefit now live with the drawback.
Now Windows. What the F.... It was chosen because it described exactly what the program was trying to do with a metaphor that everyone understood. They reaped the benefit now they should live with the drawback, or change themselves.
Good initial names that turns on the corporation is common. Take Kentucky Fried Chicken. They now spend millions to get rid of the Fried connotation as they repositions themselves as KFC. Does that mean that using the initial name was foolish? No, They wouldn't have got to where they are without the initial descriptive name.
Same can be argued for Microsoft's Windows,
Agree totally. Interestingly you do not really need to win any battles, only make sure you will be around for the next skirmish.
MS lost every battle aganist DOJ but still won the war, the Vietcong hardly fought any battles let alone won one.
OpenSource will not go away, it can't as long as individual programmers are "scratching itches".
I do not understand why you think that OpenSource is exempted from capitalist market forces. It is precisely the market forces that the OpenSource movement wants put into play and that MS et al is afraid of.
You can not do this. The license does not exist in a vacuum relative to the problem that the SW is trying to solve.
Indeed it does. The beauty of this is that every time a piece of FUD like this arrives, it adds mindshare of OpenSource to the equation.
It's like the old Monty Python sketch when in the cockpit of a plane John Cleese takes the microphone and informs the passenger that "There is no cause for alarm". When asked why he did that claiming the passengers now have to ponder "What is there no cause for alarm For!
This junk by MS almost ensures an invite for OpenSource to the party.
Interesting, I didn't know there was such a Rule/ Law of Usenet before your comment. I guess if you start with the Nazi subject your are exempted. ;-)
Maybe / maybe not but consider this
Industrial Leaders
It is easy to forget about prominant business men when focusing on figures like Eichmann or Hoss, but the industrialists who were eager to create factories at Auschwitz were perpetrators of the horror too.
Many prominent German corporations, among them Krupp, Siemens and Bayer, were interested in what might be negotiated. Auschwitz began developing a network of outlying subcamps, thirty-four in all. Soon, the prisoners worked at a cement plant, a coal-mine, a steel factory and a shoe factory.
The biggest of these Auschwitz subcamps was the I.G. Farben plant. The plant was known as Buna because its principal purpose was to produce synthetic rubber; its other main installation was a hydrogenation plant designed to convert coal into oil. The Auschwitz factories were the largest in the Farben empire. Conditions at Buna were much like those at Auschwitz. The dawn roll calls, the starvation rations, the labor gangs sent out for twelve hours at a time, forced to work at the gas chambers and furnaces, beaten by guards, harried by giant dogs. The prisoners who died of overwork (dozens of them every day) had to be hauled back to camp at nightfall so that they could be propped up and counted at the next morning's roll call.
Ultimately, around 25,000 people were killed during the construction of the I.G. Farben plant.
This would have been a perfectly good answer to the story earlier about likelyhood of OpenSource going mainstream. Why would anyone want OpenSource to do just that.
Assuming you are not trolling I will answer.
The point is that both GM and Exxon has 10 times the sales of MS, Makes as much money as MS but their Capitalization (outstanding shares times share price) is 1/3 or so. Look at the various ratios for different industries and you will be surprised.
Oh please oh please relegate me to the status of GM
I were not talking about you, I was talking about Microsoft. Going from Joe's Garage shop to GM status is not too shappy but that was not what the comment was about.
If you haven't read Clayton Christensen's Innovators Dilemma you owe it to yourselves to do that.
One of the observations he makes when a disruptive technology comes along is that the dominat player in the "level" above always gets displaced.
It's an interesting point but makes little difference. These guys have probably carried laptops for years, as has a lot of other people. The market is flat.
The issue at hand is where the growth is going to be, being the top dog in a stagnant market is fine but MS' valuation is based on growth. If they can't grow they will be relegated to the status of GM or Exxon.
Nothing wrong per se but share prices will be 1/5'th of current.
After the Lisa Maria Presley fiasco I think he is currently busy Saving Face.
No, threaten to sue is perfectly legal.
Why can't you sue them? You can sue anybody for anything. Your case might be thrown out, and you might have to pay for a frivilous suit, but in principle you can sue. You can send them a bill to start with. Go to small claims court to state your case. Chances are they will not show up and you win by default. Then you have a legal claim you can use to attach any assests they might have. Etc. Etc.
I guess what I am trying to say you can harrass them as much as you like.
Who would have thunk this was stated by Ashcroft?
[Senator Ashcroft takes issue with administration views on the Internet and the use of encryption technology.]
. . . . . . . The Clinton administration would like the Federal government to have the capability to read any international or domestic computer communications. The FBI wants access to decode, digest, and discuss financial transactions, personal e-mail, and proprietary information sent abroad -- all in the name of national security.
. . . . This proposed policy raises obvious concerns about Americans' privacy, in addition to tampering with the competitive advantage that our U.S. software companies currently enjoy in the field of encryption technology. Not only would Big Brother be looming over the shoulders of international cyber-surfers, but the administration threatens to render our state-of-the-art computer software engineers obsolete and unemployed.
Do you resemble Ellen Feiss by any chance?
It existed until the 60's. There was a fair amount of Lore around the Daler, notably used at Brothels for depositing payment at a certain part of the girls.
Read the post again. I didn't make a comment on right or wrong of stealing software from MS. The comment was about my involvement if fixing windows problems for other people.
I do not steal from Microsoft, nor do I do their job for free.