Sure... and with prohibitions on any commercial use, licensing requirements, equipment costs several to a dozen times more expensive than cellular phones, no encrypted privacy permitted by FCC regulation (meaning everyone can hear your "call"), and no logical "call routing" architecture to locate a specific party (other than saying their callsign), you think the cellular industry will waste two seconds worrying about this?
Per the FCC, they've been strong supporters of the amateur service.
Actually, the only concern I'd have about this is that places amateur radio interdependencies on the public telecom network - something we're supposed to not depend upon as part of our public service mission.
And it seems that if you scream, shout and intimidate people in an attempt to influence a national election regardless of the vote, it's free speech.
Sure, like the known hecklers that got thrown in jail for 48 hours when Bubba Clinton came to town last fall.
Kind of hard to scream and shout when you're held in jail without charges, then released when Bubba's gone.
When you act annoying on a conservative web forum, it's illegal and you get taken to court.
When you write annoying opposing thoughts to a liberal president, it's not illegal and you get thrown in jail without going to court.
However, when you put metal spikes in trees trying to kill loggers, hack opposing websites to supress speech that you don't like, steal campus newspapers that prints things you don't agree with, torch expensive houses built on land you think should go back to the wild to deprive people of their homes, send bombs to conservative businessmen who you believe don't appreciate the environment, break into research labs and set infected animals free, it's considered "progressive activism" and is regarded by the social elite to be an acceptable means to the end?
I'm surprised I didn't see reference to the other TLD that Verisign controls -.us
We've been trying to deal with them to clean up.us subdomains that are being camped on by companies in different parts of the country from the region they're supposed to be handling (a violation of the.us AUP, but apparently unenforced by Verisign).
What would Red-Hat do with be? What wouldn't they do? Stock price is depressed, though through some creative accounting, they've managed to be approximately break-even.
Acquisitions at discount prices might bring in interesting assets that create "synergies" - investor code for moving that stock up. Then again, they'd probably pay at a premium and see RHAT go down:-( It's a crap shoot, but don't forget that many (most?) of your acquistions are fed by egos and fuzzy marketing paradigm talk. So we need to (gasp) answer the question in fuzzy marketing droid land.
Be might also provide a solution to one of the biggest negatives of RHAT - that it's a geek-driven server OS. Sure, you might enjoy spending a few hours a day working under the hood of your desktop. Having built a company on the existance of Linux and running it throughout my house as I post, I still have to fire up Win2K to get business work done (Visio / Excel / Word / Powerpoint / MSProject have no real competitors - sorry!). Be changes things for RHAT by finally giving them a real client for the 95% out there and might compel enough Wall Streeters to believe that RHAT is *the* candidate to take on Microsoft (who, sorry Apple folks, is presently uncontested).
Bottom line: Redhat Linux + Redhat ClientOS (BeOS renamed) gives us a total package for the corporate environment (and gets them creeping into the consumer market). If RHAT is earning their paychecks by providing service, they need to play on Linux's present Internet server (web, mail, dns, etc.) dominance while they still have it and dislodge Microsoft before they strike again (not to mention the nibbling by the *BSDs).
What would Oracle do with it?
I concur with the technical observations referenced above, but don't forget Oracle's wanderings into clientware ("network appliance" land, for example). And don't forget for a second that Larry Ellison knows very well that Microsoft has just about executed their move that'll cut "independent" Oracle out of the foodchain. Squeezed between Interbase going open and Microsoft going nearly desktop (one SQL license included in every box of MCSEloops), he's going to get hammered standing still.
MS-SQL's a predator in its pricing. Larry screwed up by getting fat, dumb and happy off of extortion pricing (same mistake Novell made). The more Microsoft packages end-to-end and makes enterprise computing a single purchase, the more obsolete Oracle's current model becomes. (RHAT's lack of licensing baggage really allows them to leapfrog MSoft here - e.g. "Buy our server and client package and every client comes with all of our application software ready to use. Forget about licensing hassels!" kind of possibilities emerge. And the alternative is what... a Microsoft SPA world where every executable must be registered and hardware checks to make sure you've licensed that MP3? Talk about a perfect setup for Redhat!)
That all said, an Oracle/Be deal is most unlikely due to the personalities. Gassee thinks he's too much of a celeb to subvert to Ellison's leadership. RHAT shouldn't make the same mistake - OS comes and Gassee has a Sculley "evangelist" role.
This all said, you need to look at some of the roadkill to see what's in store for Redhat and Oracle (and haunts their execs, compelling evaluation of deals like this):
Infamous "Server Only" companies - Silicon Graphics
- Sun (who's trying to escape that with languages, tools, etc. but probably won't be enough in the longhaul)
- Digital (acquired by a client hardware company... how dehumanizing!)
The same goes for "database only" companies, I'm afraid.
Bottom line: IF ubiquiteous net-based software clients are to be the future, Redhat had better move quickly to get the other half of the equation, and might just become a real threat (with newer tools and newer distribution models) to Microsoft. A serious threat that Balmer loses sleep over.
Oracle? Long shot acquirer, and probably relegated to being a lesser tool provider. Larry should be happy, tho, since he got much more than 15 minutes...
*scoove*
(Whew... three lines of a short JonKatz post... my fingers are tired!)
As much as this would be interesting, I'd have to doubt any such open source "divestiture of the company's assets" would ever sneak past bankruptcy court, let alone the shark pool of shareholder class action attorneys.
Instead, watch BeOS get sold off to Oracle in a sweetheart deal and Gassee get some crazy title like "chief desktop imagineer." This would give Oracle the missing ingredient in its ambition of conquering Microsoft and allow them to mold their offering into a "Oracle-knowledge server + BeOS network appliance" package.
Interestingly, BeOS may be worth more dead and resurrected than in its current form. A functional desktop solves the puzzled for more than a few companies. If I were Redhat's CEO, I'd be on a plane yesterday working the deal on acquiring BeOS, releasing it to the open source world and having (finally) a complete client and server package.
It's just a shame it was impossible to find software for it.
The company I worked for a couple of years ago filled out a Be developer app, wanting to evaluate using Be for the next generation of the company's retail kiosk systems. Stuff had been built on DOS initially and migrated to Win3.1, and even in 1997-8, thousands of DOS systems were still out there in dire need of upgrade.
So what was Be's response to the application - which would have put Be systems in retail stores nationwide?
"Not interested, but you can buy a copy of BeOS on our website."
$49.00 smart... chapter-11 stupid.
As much as you may want to rag on them, companies like Microsoft and Oracle understand the developer market. Be didn't, ended up with essentially no apps, and is functionally dead.
How dare those Northpoint employees leave their jobs without taking care of the customers. So what if there's no money left for payroll - serves them right for running such a crummy company.
While we're at it, let's get that sock puppet back on TV and start pumping out the pet goodies retailing at 50% of cost. Consumers have a right to underpriced goods - it's the Priceline way! (you knew it was only time until Shatner ran for Gov!)
And if Nevada and Oregon don't want to continue to provide Californians energy at the price Californians named, then what are those National Guard folks doing sitting around? Fire up the tanks, we've got a green economy to fuel!!!
And I thought there weren't any plans to make Atlas Shrugged into a movie...
If Acme Corp wants Northpoint's customers, then Acme Corp better give Northpoint enough money to stay afloat long enough to migrate the customers over.
Good point, except when you're dealing with LECs. In the Midwest, the LECs I've been dealing with have been salivating over the DSL market. While they feigned difficulties in provisioning the CLEC orders, amazingly "ran out of room" in empty 14 story centers (Qwest, formerly US West, moved a bunch of junk desks into them and assigned temporary employees there in one city so they could claim they had no more colo space to offer CLECs), etc. they had more than a hunch that if the CLECs didn't get sufficient marketshare and subscriber base, they'd go belly up. (Good guess)
And LECs don't have to pay for the purchase of the CLEC customers. They let them crawl back to the LEC, occasionally sending out reminders like the ones US West sent out when Cox started offering phone service. Three months after switching, I got a postcard that said:
"We know you want to come back because the service you're getting isn't up to US West quality. Making poor choices in your phone service can be costly to you. Right now, we'll waive the install fee if you return during this special period."
Anyway, it looks like DSL isn't profitable below $70 or more... *sigh*
Good objective points from child_of_mercy. Unfortunately VC's in general are not objective.
The costs are well known, they know what they are planning to charge.
Costs are a funny thing. Look at your typical VC-funded startup. Instead of "doing the right thing", they get told (by the VC) to buy "solutions from Lucent" (or insert your favorite dead but still doesn't know it 1950s culture company repackaged-for-your-enjoyment dot-com name here).
Remember the VC line: "You don't have time to grow organically! We've projected you to triple in size every month in order to facilitate our exit strategy."
Having spent the last 2.6 years at one of these, I watched people spend $5 million a shot on things that cost...well... two linux boxes and a good weekend. Their answer to the challenge? "Hell if I know. The VCs said they'd fund it." (Seriously, ever here of Billdats? That's the Lucent word for "takes a linux boxen, perl, ftp and a good weekend... $3 million please")
They know how much Venture Capital they have.
But they're always planning on more. It's a drug. The best companies I've seen never got hooked, unfortunately.
And knowing that they go offering a service hoping someone will just give them more money to make them viable!
Does throwing money at bad management, bad vendors, bad processes, etc. make them viable over time? Usually it just grows very big ineffective companies. (Of course, it does make for very nice Ebay auctions of the spoils from such chapter 7's...)
Nothing beats the power of the market to kill off the weak VC ploys.
Hope they can get funding enough to allow their DSL customers to migrate to other providers.
Why?
This is where/. loses me sometimes (usually during the midst of a 340 page JonKatz angst-filled essay on the evils of capitalism).
Can any slashdotter name where funding comes from? Yes, the same schucks that are getting pounded on Wall Street right now. Idiots like myself that bought Redhat (yea, stupid idea, I know).
Why would any halfway sane investor put money into something only to fund moving customers away?
And don't these customers share some accountability, chosing an undercapitalized, poorly managed provider?
What you say ? They exist (primarily) so that consumers know where a product actually came from
Seems reasonable when implemented on a reasonable level. But is owning three letters of the alphabet reasonable?
I own part of a company that uses three letters to abbreviate its name (I'll use ARC as an example). My attorneys have made it very clear to us that we can only reasonably protect ARC when used within our uniquely designed logo. If someone else uses ARC in that logo, they're in violation of our trademark.
What I cannot protect is:
- someone else using only the letters ARC in their business or product names
- someone else using ARC within a business or product name (e.g. Sparcstation - even if Sun chose to spell it SpARCstation, I have no claim)
Likewise, my product name trademarks are for specific categories. There is another company using the exact same product name that we have TM'ed to make a brand of space heaters. They own it in their class, we own it in our class.
I'd have to believe that unless someone at the USPTO was on LSD when they gave away three letters of our alphabet, Ylonnen's attorneys have a weak claim unless they can demonstrate that the mark (not the letters) was infringed upon. (How many "ABC" companies do you see out there? Does American Broadcasting Company go after them? What about all the kids games that say "ABC" on the cover? Trademark infringement for use of the same three letters in the same sequence? Not!)
Incidentally, I have put the SSH company on my list of banned vendors at our company. Any vendor that's willing to lie and cheat the IETF and Internet community is likely to do the same to me.
*scoove*
IANAL, but I've put many of their kids through college.
"Here's my application IETF. Please use the name I've provided for the standard."
(a few years later after the standard has been adopted and well used, and through the IETF's acceptance, making the initiator's application software have value)
"Hey IETF, quit using my name or I'll sue!"
I think Ylonnen's cost for IETF promotion and publicity is the open, non-infringing use of the SSH name. Otherwise, how else does he propose to compensate the IETF and the Internet community for the benefit he received (and arguably through his claim to yank back what he initially offered to the community with no strings attached, unethically).
Our new Democratic senator, Ben Nelson, has chosen to not use email as a means of hearing from his constituents.
After trying calls for 45 minutes, I got through to his assistants who told me that he had no plans on adding one since it was "too much of a hassel." Apparently making your constituents have to dial for 45 minutes (for what sounded like a total of two staffers answering phones - nifty bottleneck) isn't a hassel...
What's next? Limiting calls to one phone line, one hour a day? Rejecting U.S. mail letters? I think our freshman senator has found a new way to say "Gosh, I never heard anything from my constituents to the contrary of my opinion, so that's why I voted that way."
Forget yellow journalism. These guys are just using a different financial method (totally legit!):
Business Dictionary for CS Graduates
profit: having cash in your hand that can be used to buy cool tech toys.
press release: an exciting fable that tells of a ficticious business with the same name as yours that's having outstanding success. Can be sent to a newswire, which is a press release receiving machine that sends more profit to your bank account, usually within a few hours. See dot-com ATM machine for further definition.
bankrupcy: 1. the condition of not having profit; 2. what your attorneys make you file for after you haven't paid employees for three months, have pilfered all the equipment and moved the customer accounts to your new business.
Better we all buy multiple copies of the same CD so we can keep one in the car, one at work, one at home...
Imagine the new revenue opportunities for the recording industry as you check out of Best Buy:
Sales clerk: Now we just have a few questions before we can sell you Tupac's Greatest Hits. First, will this CD be for home, office, auto or portable use?
Purchaser: Well, I guess mostly for home. But I'll probably listen to it in the car too.
Sales clerk: Oh, then you'll want our enterprise license. It'll allow you full locational use rights. Do you ever have passengers in your car?
Purchaser: Well yea. Sometimes.
Sales clerk: OK. We'll mark you down for the 10 seat license expansion. As you may be aware, CD media is subject to wear and tear and replacement can be expensive. Would you like the optional RIAA replacement warranty, allowing you to obtain a replacement CD should this one become damaged, for only an additional $9.95?
Purchaser: Err... I guess so.
Sales clerk: Fine. That brings your total to $43.45, not including sales tax. They'll ring this up front for you.
Yea, and as an ISP operator I can promise you that after about the first half-dozen support calls we get from customers who've repointed their DNS to this alternate provider, or who are now having problems with this plug-in, we're going to discard Idealab's IPs when they enter our autonomous system.
Sounds like something I'd really want to invest in... != (of course, when you look at Idealab's track record, most of their other investments have the same merit and performance).
Now we'll be required to read the fine print of a EULA before unpacking that toaster, waffle iron, hair dryer, etc:
ACME TOASTER 1000 END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
Congratulations on your purchase of a ACME Toaster 1000. Prior to opening and using this toaster, you must read and accept the terms of this agreement.
I. GRANT OF LICENSE.
The EULA gives you the following rights:
Toast: You may toast bread slices or bagels not exceeding 44 mm in width in this device. Waffles are not allowed in this device without the purchase of the WAFFLE EXPANSION LICENSE.
Multiple Use: Only one household user is allowed per toaster. Use by other parties is prohibited and is a violation of this agreement (see SERVER TOASTER OPTION in the user manual for details on multiple use toasters).
II. RESTRICTIONS:
1. Limitations of Reverse Engineering: You may not disassemble, open, or otherwise alter this toaster.
2. Rental: You may not rent this toaster. Stuck, wedged or otherwise immobile toasted objects require removal by an authorized service technician.
3. Transfer: ACME has sold you a limited license to the use of this toaster. You may not transfer this license to another individual and are required to destroy this toaster or return it to ACME at your expense should you not require use of the toaster.
4. Location: Use of this toaster has been granted per the license for use within a limited geographic region, not to exceed 30 miles of the site at which the toaster was purchased. ANY MOVEMENT OF THE TOASTER OUTSIDE THIS LICENSED REGION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MOVING RESIDENCES TO ANOTHER CITY OR LOCALE, SENDING THE TOASTER AS A GIFT, OR USE OF THE TOASTER IN A MOBILE VEHICLE/CAMPER, WILL INVALIDATE ITS LICENSE AND CAUSE THE TOASTER TO CEASE OPERATION.
You've got me totally confused. As a supporter of your right to make obscene profits, conquer markets and drive the competitors to their death, I have to admit that I was totally taken aback today when I heard your position on open source.
People, you claim, do not have a right to their property if they choose to give it away. The only appropriate use of property is for the greater good, you say, and in this case, for the greater good of corporate society (which is somehow different than the social society you diametrically oppose in your antitrust litigation).
Open source is a misuse of property, according to your observations, and takes innovation that should benefit the good of the corporate community and destroys it, depriving poor corporations of their right to monopolize them. Only by preventing selfish programmers from carelessly giving their innovations away without going through a corporate party can this community property be protected.
Only government action, you state, can protect helpless corporations from this destructive action, such as mandatory programmer licenses, outlawing of open source and free software (unless it says Internet Explorer on it and comes from Microsoft), and minimum pricing standards to require a fee for all software.
With all this said, please help me understand your demands are any different from any other redistributionist thief's views. Help me determine why I should defend your rights any further, instead of regarding you as yet another parasite.
The OpenSSH can be called OpenTomato and have SSH support claims all over their product description of they want.
Sure. And when they refer to the protocol OpenTomato supports, what will they say then? Includes SS...er... whoops! That's trademarked.
Trademarking "open standards" is intellectual property theft of a more devious sort. It's like donating stuff to Goodwill and then stealing it back at night, after you've claimed credit for being a good guy.
And claiming trademarks for three letters just seems to lead down to the inevitable path often humored on/. - "We're sorry, the letters S, H and E are registered trademarks. Please pick another."
Slashdot Mirror
Sure... and with prohibitions on any commercial use, licensing requirements, equipment costs several to a dozen times more expensive than cellular phones, no encrypted privacy permitted by FCC regulation (meaning everyone can hear your "call"), and no logical "call routing" architecture to locate a specific party (other than saying their callsign), you think the cellular industry will waste two seconds worrying about this?
Per the FCC, they've been strong supporters of the amateur service.
Actually, the only concern I'd have about this is that places amateur radio interdependencies on the public telecom network - something we're supposed to not depend upon as part of our public service mission.
*scoove*
Yea, you know it's bad when they introduce him as the "Representative from the Great State of BellSouth"...
*scoove*
And it seems that if you scream, shout and intimidate people in an attempt to influence a national election regardless of the vote, it's free speech.
Sure, like the known hecklers that got thrown in jail for 48 hours when Bubba Clinton came to town last fall.
Kind of hard to scream and shout when you're held in jail without charges, then released when Bubba's gone.
When you act annoying on a conservative web forum, it's illegal and you get taken to court.
When you write annoying opposing thoughts to a liberal president, it's not illegal and you get thrown in jail without going to court.
However, when you put metal spikes in trees trying to kill loggers, hack opposing websites to supress speech that you don't like, steal campus newspapers that prints things you don't agree with, torch expensive houses built on land you think should go back to the wild to deprive people of their homes, send bombs to conservative businessmen who you believe don't appreciate the environment, break into research labs and set infected animals free, it's considered "progressive activism" and is regarded by the social elite to be an acceptable means to the end?
Funny world.
I'd have to agree...
I'm surprised I didn't see reference to the other TLD that Verisign controls - .us
.us subdomains that are being camped on by companies in different parts of the country from the region they're supposed to be handling (a violation of the .us AUP, but apparently unenforced by Verisign).
We've been trying to deal with them to clean up
Perhaps they're over their head?
*scoove*
Fountainhead... Gary Cooper reads his way thru the script, and Patricia Neal does a pretty good job.
*scoove*
What would Red-Hat do with be?
What wouldn't they do? Stock price is depressed, though through some creative accounting, they've managed to be approximately break-even.
Acquisitions at discount prices might bring in interesting assets that create "synergies" - investor code for moving that stock up. Then again, they'd probably pay at a premium and see RHAT go down:-( It's a crap shoot, but don't forget that many (most?) of your acquistions are fed by egos and fuzzy marketing paradigm talk. So we need to (gasp) answer the question in fuzzy marketing droid land.
Be might also provide a solution to one of the biggest negatives of RHAT - that it's a geek-driven server OS. Sure, you might enjoy spending a few hours a day working under the hood of your desktop. Having built a company on the existance of Linux and running it throughout my house as I post, I still have to fire up Win2K to get business work done (Visio / Excel / Word / Powerpoint / MSProject have no real competitors - sorry!). Be changes things for RHAT by finally giving them a real client for the 95% out there and might compel enough Wall Streeters to believe that RHAT is *the* candidate to take on Microsoft (who, sorry Apple folks, is presently uncontested).
Bottom line: Redhat Linux + Redhat ClientOS (BeOS renamed) gives us a total package for the corporate environment (and gets them creeping into the consumer market). If RHAT is earning their paychecks by providing service, they need to play on Linux's present Internet server (web, mail, dns, etc.) dominance while they still have it and dislodge Microsoft before they strike again (not to mention the nibbling by the *BSDs).
What would Oracle do with it?
I concur with the technical observations referenced above, but don't forget Oracle's wanderings into clientware ("network appliance" land, for example). And don't forget for a second that Larry Ellison knows very well that Microsoft has just about executed their move that'll cut "independent" Oracle out of the foodchain. Squeezed between Interbase going open and Microsoft going nearly desktop (one SQL license included in every box of MCSEloops), he's going to get hammered standing still.
MS-SQL's a predator in its pricing. Larry screwed up by getting fat, dumb and happy off of extortion pricing (same mistake Novell made). The more Microsoft packages end-to-end and makes enterprise computing a single purchase, the more obsolete Oracle's current model becomes. (RHAT's lack of licensing baggage really allows them to leapfrog MSoft here - e.g. "Buy our server and client package and every client comes with all of our application software ready to use. Forget about licensing hassels!" kind of possibilities emerge. And the alternative is what... a Microsoft SPA world where every executable must be registered and hardware checks to make sure you've licensed that MP3? Talk about a perfect setup for Redhat!)
That all said, an Oracle/Be deal is most unlikely due to the personalities. Gassee thinks he's too much of a celeb to subvert to Ellison's leadership. RHAT shouldn't make the same mistake - OS comes and Gassee has a Sculley "evangelist" role.
This all said, you need to look at some of the roadkill to see what's in store for Redhat and Oracle (and haunts their execs, compelling evaluation of deals like this):
Infamous "Server Only" companies
- Silicon Graphics
- Sun (who's trying to escape that with languages, tools, etc. but probably won't be enough in the longhaul)
- Digital (acquired by a client hardware company... how dehumanizing!)
The same goes for "database only" companies, I'm afraid.
Bottom line: IF ubiquiteous net-based software clients are to be the future, Redhat had better move quickly to get the other half of the equation, and might just become a real threat (with newer tools and newer distribution models) to Microsoft. A serious threat that Balmer loses sleep over.
Oracle? Long shot acquirer, and probably relegated to being a lesser tool provider. Larry should be happy, tho, since he got much more than 15 minutes...
*scoove*
(Whew... three lines of a short JonKatz post... my fingers are tired!)
As much as this would be interesting, I'd have to doubt any such open source "divestiture of the company's assets" would ever sneak past bankruptcy court, let alone the shark pool of shareholder class action attorneys.
Instead, watch BeOS get sold off to Oracle in a sweetheart deal and Gassee get some crazy title like "chief desktop imagineer." This would give Oracle the missing ingredient in its ambition of conquering Microsoft and allow them to mold their offering into a "Oracle-knowledge server + BeOS network appliance" package.
Interestingly, BeOS may be worth more dead and resurrected than in its current form. A functional desktop solves the puzzled for more than a few companies. If I were Redhat's CEO, I'd be on a plane yesterday working the deal on acquiring BeOS, releasing it to the open source world and having (finally) a complete client and server package.
Now there's a challenge for Microsoft...
*scoove*
It's just a shame it was impossible to find software for it.
The company I worked for a couple of years ago filled out a Be developer app, wanting to evaluate using Be for the next generation of the company's retail kiosk systems. Stuff had been built on DOS initially and migrated to Win3.1, and even in 1997-8, thousands of DOS systems were still out there in dire need of upgrade.
So what was Be's response to the application - which would have put Be systems in retail stores nationwide?
"Not interested, but you can buy a copy of BeOS on our website."
$49.00 smart... chapter-11 stupid.
As much as you may want to rag on them, companies like Microsoft and Oracle understand the developer market. Be didn't, ended up with essentially no apps, and is functionally dead.
*scoove*
How dare those Northpoint employees leave their jobs without taking care of the customers. So what if there's no money left for payroll - serves them right for running such a crummy company.
While we're at it, let's get that sock puppet back on TV and start pumping out the pet goodies retailing at 50% of cost. Consumers have a right to underpriced goods - it's the Priceline way! (you knew it was only time until Shatner ran for Gov!)
And if Nevada and Oregon don't want to continue to provide Californians energy at the price Californians named, then what are those National Guard folks doing sitting around? Fire up the tanks, we've got a green economy to fuel!!!
And I thought there weren't any plans to make Atlas Shrugged into a movie...
*scoove*
If Acme Corp wants Northpoint's customers, then Acme Corp better give Northpoint enough money to stay afloat long enough to migrate the customers over.
Good point, except when you're dealing with LECs. In the Midwest, the LECs I've been dealing with have been salivating over the DSL market. While they feigned difficulties in provisioning the CLEC orders, amazingly "ran out of room" in empty 14 story centers (Qwest, formerly US West, moved a bunch of junk desks into them and assigned temporary employees there in one city so they could claim they had no more colo space to offer CLECs), etc. they had more than a hunch that if the CLECs didn't get sufficient marketshare and subscriber base, they'd go belly up. (Good guess)
And LECs don't have to pay for the purchase of the CLEC customers. They let them crawl back to the LEC, occasionally sending out reminders like the ones US West sent out when Cox started offering phone service. Three months after switching, I got a postcard that said:
"We know you want to come back because the service you're getting isn't up to US West quality. Making poor choices in your phone service can be costly to you. Right now, we'll waive the install fee if you return during this special period."
Anyway, it looks like DSL isn't profitable below $70 or more... *sigh*
*scoove*
Good objective points from child_of_mercy. Unfortunately VC's in general are not objective.
The costs are well known, they know what they are planning to charge.
Costs are a funny thing. Look at your typical VC-funded startup. Instead of "doing the right thing", they get told (by the VC) to buy "solutions from Lucent" (or insert your favorite dead but still doesn't know it 1950s culture company repackaged-for-your-enjoyment dot-com name here).
Remember the VC line: "You don't have time to grow organically! We've projected you to triple in size every month in order to facilitate our exit strategy."
Having spent the last 2.6 years at one of these, I watched people spend $5 million a shot on things that cost...well... two linux boxes and a good weekend. Their answer to the challenge? "Hell if I know. The VCs said they'd fund it." (Seriously, ever here of Billdats? That's the Lucent word for "takes a linux boxen, perl, ftp and a good weekend... $3 million please")
They know how much Venture Capital they have.
But they're always planning on more. It's a drug. The best companies I've seen never got hooked, unfortunately.
And knowing that they go offering a service hoping someone will just give them more money to make them viable!
Does throwing money at bad management, bad vendors, bad processes, etc. make them viable over time? Usually it just grows very big ineffective companies. (Of course, it does make for very nice Ebay auctions of the spoils from such chapter 7's...)
Nothing beats the power of the market to kill off the weak VC ploys.
*scoove*
Hope they can get funding enough to allow their DSL customers to migrate to other providers.
/. loses me sometimes (usually during the midst of a 340 page JonKatz angst-filled essay on the evils of capitalism).
Why?
This is where
Can any slashdotter name where funding comes from? Yes, the same schucks that are getting pounded on Wall Street right now. Idiots like myself that bought Redhat (yea, stupid idea, I know).
Why would any halfway sane investor put money into something only to fund moving customers away?
And don't these customers share some accountability, chosing an undercapitalized, poorly managed provider?
*scoove*
What you say ? They exist (primarily) so that consumers know where a product actually came from
Seems reasonable when implemented on a reasonable level. But is owning three letters of the alphabet reasonable?
I own part of a company that uses three letters to abbreviate its name (I'll use ARC as an example). My attorneys have made it very clear to us that we can only reasonably protect ARC when used within our uniquely designed logo. If someone else uses ARC in that logo, they're in violation of our trademark.
What I cannot protect is:
- someone else using only the letters ARC in their business or product names
- someone else using ARC within a business or product name (e.g. Sparcstation - even if Sun chose to spell it SpARCstation, I have no claim)
Likewise, my product name trademarks are for specific categories. There is another company using the exact same product name that we have TM'ed to make a brand of space heaters. They own it in their class, we own it in our class.
I'd have to believe that unless someone at the USPTO was on LSD when they gave away three letters of our alphabet, Ylonnen's attorneys have a weak claim unless they can demonstrate that the mark (not the letters) was infringed upon. (How many "ABC" companies do you see out there? Does American Broadcasting Company go after them? What about all the kids games that say "ABC" on the cover? Trademark infringement for use of the same three letters in the same sequence? Not!)
Incidentally, I have put the SSH company on my list of banned vendors at our company. Any vendor that's willing to lie and cheat the IETF and Internet community is likely to do the same to me.
*scoove*
IANAL, but I've put many of their kids through college.
Makes sense... not.
"Here's my application IETF. Please use the name I've provided for the standard."
(a few years later after the standard has been adopted and well used, and through the IETF's acceptance, making the initiator's application software have value)
"Hey IETF, quit using my name or I'll sue!"
I think Ylonnen's cost for IETF promotion and publicity is the open, non-infringing use of the SSH name. Otherwise, how else does he propose to compensate the IETF and the Internet community for the benefit he received (and arguably through his claim to yank back what he initially offered to the community with no strings attached, unethically).
*scoove*
companies have started to find ways around unions
While not exactly a tech company, Vickers closed down a 500+ employee plant in Omaha when it chose to unionize.
While I'm not a big union fan, this level of backlash does seem excessive...
*scoove*
Our new Democratic senator, Ben Nelson, has chosen to not use email as a means of hearing from his constituents.
After trying calls for 45 minutes, I got through to his assistants who told me that he had no plans on adding one since it was "too much of a hassel." Apparently making your constituents have to dial for 45 minutes (for what sounded like a total of two staffers answering phones - nifty bottleneck) isn't a hassel...
What's next? Limiting calls to one phone line, one hour a day? Rejecting U.S. mail letters? I think our freshman senator has found a new way to say "Gosh, I never heard anything from my constituents to the contrary of my opinion, so that's why I voted that way."
So much for a "representative" republic...
*scoove*
Forget yellow journalism. These guys are just using a different financial method (totally legit!):
Business Dictionary for CS Graduates
profit: having cash in your hand that can be used to buy cool tech toys.
press release: an exciting fable that tells of a ficticious business with the same name as yours that's having outstanding success. Can be sent to a newswire, which is a press release receiving machine that sends more profit to your bank account, usually within a few hours. See dot-com ATM machine for further definition.
bankrupcy: 1. the condition of not having profit; 2. what your attorneys make you file for after you haven't paid employees for three months, have pilfered all the equipment and moved the customer accounts to your new business.
According to the company's own website, times couldn't be better:
And the company is making a profit. "We are in the black -- an amazing concept, isn't it, among these startup tech companies?" (Linuxgruven website)
Must have been a rough February...
*scoove*
Imagine the new revenue opportunities for the recording industry as you check out of Best Buy:
Sales clerk: Now we just have a few questions before we can sell you Tupac's Greatest Hits. First, will this CD be for home, office, auto or portable use?
Purchaser: Well, I guess mostly for home. But I'll probably listen to it in the car too.
Sales clerk: Oh, then you'll want our enterprise license. It'll allow you full locational use rights. Do you ever have passengers in your car?
Purchaser: Well yea. Sometimes.
Sales clerk: OK. We'll mark you down for the 10 seat license expansion. As you may be aware, CD media is subject to wear and tear and replacement can be expensive. Would you like the optional RIAA replacement warranty, allowing you to obtain a replacement CD should this one become damaged, for only an additional $9.95?
Purchaser: Err... I guess so.
Sales clerk: Fine. That brings your total to $43.45, not including sales tax. They'll ring this up front for you.
*scoove*
"RIAA: Revenue Increase Absent Artists"
Yea, and as an ISP operator I can promise you that after about the first half-dozen support calls we get from customers who've repointed their DNS to this alternate provider, or who are now having problems with this plug-in, we're going to discard Idealab's IPs when they enter our autonomous system.
Sounds like something I'd really want to invest in... != (of course, when you look at Idealab's track record, most of their other investments have the same merit and performance).
*scoove*
Holy cow. I missed that one.
/knew/ those intellectual property attornies would find an angle in there...
Toast is a derivative work, and obviously the intellectual property of ACME, Inc.
Somehow I just
*scoove*
ACME TOASTER 1000 END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
Congratulations on your purchase of a ACME Toaster 1000. Prior to opening and using this toaster, you must read and accept the terms of this agreement.
I. GRANT OF LICENSE.
The EULA gives you the following rights:
II. RESTRICTIONS:
Sounds like our Finnish friends have been watching too much southpark
Three easy steps to making money:
1. Create open source protocols (aka "SSH") and engage in community support of standard.
2. ?
3. Panic that people are using the name of the standard you asked them to. Issue threatening legal letters. Make big profits.
*scoove*
SSH, Inc. (TM) is off any vendor list I'd ever approve... how about you?
Dear Microsoft,
You've got me totally confused. As a supporter of your right to make obscene profits, conquer markets and drive the competitors to their death, I have to admit that I was totally taken aback today when I heard your position on open source.
People, you claim, do not have a right to their property if they choose to give it away. The only appropriate use of property is for the greater good, you say, and in this case, for the greater good of corporate society (which is somehow different than the social society you diametrically oppose in your antitrust litigation).
Open source is a misuse of property, according to your observations, and takes innovation that should benefit the good of the corporate community and destroys it, depriving poor corporations of their right to monopolize them. Only by preventing selfish programmers from carelessly giving their innovations away without going through a corporate party can this community property be protected.
Only government action, you state, can protect helpless corporations from this destructive action, such as mandatory programmer licenses, outlawing of open source and free software (unless it says Internet Explorer on it and comes from Microsoft), and minimum pricing standards to require a fee for all software.
With all this said, please help me understand your demands are any different from any other redistributionist thief's views. Help me determine why I should defend your rights any further, instead of regarding you as yet another parasite.
Sincerely,
Your Former Friend Scoove
The OpenSSH can be called OpenTomato and have SSH support claims all over their product description of they want.
/. - "We're sorry, the letters S, H and E are registered trademarks. Please pick another."
Sure. And when they refer to the protocol OpenTomato supports, what will they say then? Includes SS...er... whoops! That's trademarked.
Trademarking "open standards" is intellectual property theft of a more devious sort. It's like donating stuff to Goodwill and then stealing it back at night, after you've claimed credit for being a good guy.
And claiming trademarks for three letters just seems to lead down to the inevitable path often humored on
*scoove*