I have enough experience with voice recognition software... and have been disappointed and pleasantly surprised at the same time. But, even at it's best I find the constraints burdensome for any day to day or common use. For restricted idiomatic uses as you pointed out speech recognition is very good, and very useful.
But, this is not what Mr. Gates said in his talk. He pretty much waved his hands and said everyone would communicate that way, and the would be the main interaction with computers. He said this in 1999, and said the transformation would essentially be complete in a couple of years. That never happened. That never even came close to happening.
Assuming all of the technical hurdles were overcome (which still have not) the transformation of interacting with computers didn't, wouldn't, and won't happen more than anything because people don't interact well with inanimate objects. It's already unnerving and distracting enough to be around people talking on headsets for cell phones -- it takes a second look to realize they're not talking to "you" or anyone around "you", but are talking to someone on the phone. It's socially weird and always will be. And in the example of cell phones, that's a person actually talking to a real other person!
Imagine an office land of cubicles where people sit and gab all day to and with their computers as a main interface. It's just not going to happen. And that social setting isn't solved by giving everyone headsets, that hasn't worked even for using phones! (Yeah, there's a such thing as call centers where everyone uses headsets, but that's their defined job, and that's just how they do it... doesn't mean people LIKE having headsets on all day.)
So, back to my main and original point in my original post..., I think Mr. Gates' motivation is way different than yours. He isn't talking about making the world a better place by making computers easier to use, he's talking about making the world a hungrier place where people continue to be coaxed into the upgrade vacuum.... with empty promises of technological nirvana...
Sure. But was Microsoft flawless in its products and execution? No! What enabled MS to dominate was not technological superiority in an innovation or performance sense, but control of a platform.
I think the big (and dangerous to Microsoft) difference here and now is that Microsoft feels that "control of a platform" slipping from their grasp. They've lost good will from almost everyone, they no longer dominate because the Web is way too distributed for them to control by old techniques. I really think they are showing more fear now, and they turn to saying bad things (unprovable things, untrue things) about the rest of the competitive world hoping to gain purchase on their stranglehold that way. The world will end up being a better place all around if they finally lose that dominance.
From the fine article: "I've lost track of the number of times people
have said the personal computer has reached its limits," said Ballmer.
Well, I've lost track of the number of times Ballmer and/or Gates has
predicted the next wave in technology and were wrong.... One I found most
notable was in 1999, when Gates at a keynote speech said within a couple of
years, everyone would be communicating with their computers via speech.
And, unless you count shouting "@(*$&#@(*&$" at a recalcitrant PC as
communicating via speech, he was dead wrong.
Notable about his wrongness wasn't the "missed" prediction, in my
opinion, it was how off-the-mark his vision was -- a vision easily and with
little intuition would have predicted no PC/speech interaction, even if the
technology completely stepped up to it (it didn't).
It seems pretty clear to me Ballmer/Gates use the bully pulpit not to
make clear and visionary statements about the future, but instead to state
what they want the future to be as it relates to:
future sales of Microsoft products
squelching growth and/or success of real or potential competition.
Ballmer's bad-mouthing and demise-forecasting statements are more of the
same. What is it with Microsoft and its leadership anyway? Nobody expects
them to be patsies for the industry and its competition, but they'd earn a
little more good will and respect themselves if they'd show a little for the
others in the industry who have demonstrated real innovation and
have contributed to the industry.
I'm probably risking troll karma with this post... but really think
Ballmer, and Gates need to be called on this each time they make these
public statements... Remember, Ballmer is the guy who, in reference to the
DOJ investigation of their business practices said of the Attorney General
(and I'll just paraphrase)..., "attorney general can go to Hell".... very
rude in and of itself, and unforgivably, he used a "go to"....
Just curious, after reading the fine article, then doing a little research and reading a couple chapters of the w3c documents I wonder that anyone would change to xhtml for the sake of canonical righteousness.
Seems to me there are reasons to do xhtml... I DO like the idea of well formed objects, especially things like web pages... at least if it's well formed you've eliminated one source of nasty little bugs creeping into sites, especially sites creating pages dynamically.
But, for sites already rolled out and wrung out in public forums this seems prissy. And problematic. Consider:
what would we do with sites where users can contribute their own html (hmmmm, a particular site comes to mind...)
I've done an informal look-around, and found some popular and quite famous (hmmmm, a particular site comes to mind...
So, academically maybe a good direction to consider, but the predictions of html going away to be supplanted by xhtml is premature, and I predict something that in our internet lifetimes will never happen.
As to how this "qualifies" as a perp walk.... you're right, it isn't.... You're right, I'm being a little dramatic. You're wrong, it is socially equivalent to a perp walk. You're escorted firmly, the "papers" in manager's hands metaphorically are the cuffs. People literally turn down an aisle as they approach, and they literally divert their eyes... they know what's happening, and they turn away.
I'd say one of the big differences between this and a perp walk is that someone doing a perp walk is supposedly at least going to get a fair trial by his or her peers. Not so for the layoffee.
it makes sense to get rid of the highest paid people. If you've been there for 10 years, not only are you normally get paid more then other people, you also get more time off, and require more severance pay. Since getting rid of one high paid employee can in a lot of cases fund two lower paid ones, it also doesn't look as bad to the public.
What you are describing is evil.... what's more, it is illegal. Companies today pay millions to their legal staff to ensure when they do lay off that their numbers will pass legal muster, but that's about all they do. It's well documented (I can cite the research, ahem, and have done some on my own) how difficult it is to prove age discrimination, but plain and simple, this is what it is. And, it is still illegal.
I guess I get it as far as policy goes, but I experienced this a
year ago from a large corporation when I got laid off... My manager came to
my desk and did the perp walk with me to the office. Told me that in the
interest of cutting cough costs the company was willing to
offer me a one year severance package and let me go.
I said, "You're offering me a one year severance
package???" He looked confused, but said, "yes".
I said, "Well then I respectfully decline your offer.... I would like to
continue working for this company."
He said, "It's not optional."
I said, "Then you're not offering anything to me, you are doing
something to me."
A couple of notes about the treatment therein:
By the time I got back to my desk, all access was gone to
all systems, man they're fast!
The one year package turned out to be 60 days pay (required by the
federal WARN law), then one month's pay for every year I'd put in.... with a
10 month maximum. I had 21 years, so I got ten months pay plus the sixty
days... I consider that a ten month package.
I found it interesting that any others with ten years, eleven years,
twelve years, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen,
nineteen, and twenty years all also got the same package as mine.... so much
for any extra benefits for being a long time and loyal employee.
No information as to who else was gone was given, and those who
would still talk to me (funny how one laid off somehow develops a quick case
of leprosy) had no information internally who was laid off -- they could
only tell by seeing around them -- no lists were dispersed.
Those who may have had info would not give it (a bit of a pain since I
no longer had access to directories, phone numbers, etc.) making the process
of setting up contacts for references nigh impossible (turned out, my entire
management hierarchy was gone... and I never did find out where they all
went).
I had a few years left for qualifying for full retirement.
In my career at this company I had received the highest award given by
the company and was flown to a special ceremony to present my project and
receive that award.
Bottom line here: you don't have to be a criminal, act like a criminal,
or even be suspected of being a criminal to be treated like one....
First, any idea why my scroll wheel doesn't work on the referred page???
(It continues to work everywhere else, weird.)
Second, I wonder why this always starts, and is only going to be
available in Europe. I know the article says:
is currently limited to EMEA - a region that tends to be more
receptive to Linux than for example the US - and aims to demonstrate that a
Linux desktop can be easily transferred to a notebook....
but, this sounds like a chicken or egg, or Catch 22 scenario. How
do we break that circle? Is there a way to tell HP we do want linux
on a laptop? Or are we too hardy and independent a group/demographic we
just insist on doing this ourselves our own way. I'd love for all/.'ers
who could, to ask HP for the option in US. I can't think there'd ever be
any critical mass to make linux commercially available off-the-shelf unless
we make some kind of overture.
Relatedly, and specifically about HP, they don't completely embrace linux
yet (though I know some are going to flame me because this may be
interpreted as "not about linux").
I have an HP Pavilion ZX5000 -- great little (cough) machine! I configured
it dual boot with Mandrake 10.1, and paid the extra to get a Linuxant
wireless driver. What a great little (cough) machine! Screen resolution
1920x1200 full color, both OS's. But, when the video connector (my
diagnosis) started to loosen and my screen started to flicker I called HP
for warranty repair. During the obligatory debugging phase (reboot XP,
un-install, re-install video drivers, etc.) it was revealed I had a dual
boot setup, and they IMMEDIATELY upon hearing I had linux on the machine
refused to do the warranty repair! I escalated three times, talked to three
managers and each immediately (by scanning previous call's notes) declined
to do the warranty work claiming they had no assurance linux didn't damage
the machine. I offered to pay for repairs should they determine in the
course of fixing my machine that linux indeed was the cause. No dice.
On my fourth contact, I found a helpful person who agreed with my
diagnosis, and agreed it sounded like a loose cable and agreed to do the
warranty repair. She did however (bless her) advise me to remove the hard
drive because upon receipt, and debugging, as soon as the technicians would
see the dual boot she could not guarantee me they wouldn't immediately
re-image the disk.
Bottom line, HP is dipping their toes in the linux waters, but somehow I
think this community should demonstrate willingness and interest. I don't
know exactly what that should be but I'm willing to participate -- any
replies/suggestions -- I'm willing to try to take action.
Okay, just curious, but wondered how much of the traffic measured accounts for, knows about, figures in, etc., for Firefox "reporting in" as Internet Explorer so as not to get rejected from using that site. I have mine set to be "Internet Explorer" for my on-line banking (go figure). Think it would add any significant usage for Firefox?
As good as Apple may be, I don't believe the success of the iPod is sustainable in the long run.
I think other emerging ways to get music be they free or non-free.... they will have to become compatible with all devices, i.e., less DRM'ed, and more fair-use friendly... which iPod and iTunes is NOT. At some point there will be public awareness (am I over estimating the public's ability to figure this out?) and the public will demand more open architecture, and better quality music.
If Apple is able to sustain their dominance they'll have to do so by responding to consumers.
As for the rest of Gates' commentary, any "dominance" Microsoft reaches in cell phones/mobile technology will be achieved in the same way Microsoft has achieved dominance in their other product lines -- which means throwing money and versions at the market until something sticks... a luxury unfortunately not afforded truly creative and innovative companies.
For my own preferences I paraphrase a previous poster in a previous article thread about cell phone technology.... Give me a cell/mobile phone that has good quality voice transmission that doesn't drop calls. So far I know of no devices that meet those two simple criteria.
I once worked at Microsoft, so I will answer/reply to these as best as was my personal experience:
How is M$ leadership?
I found it to be muddled and lacking in direction. I gave Microsoft high grades for being rather horizontal, so you were never too far removed from important decision makers, but I found a certain neurosis in management because it always felt like there was a certain "fear factor".... i.e., fear of making a wrong move pissing off the wrong people... with whatever consequences... (for the record I wouldn't know what and if those consequences were)
How is M$ internal culture? Does it have low morale or high hopes for the future?
The internal culture is/was as geeky as it gets. I found all around me to be highly intelligent but quite socially disconnected. The morale was generally high, but I wouldn't describe it as high because of realistic views but more from a certain hubris... e.g. (and borrowing from Lilly Tomlin) "We're Microsoft, We don't have to care!" This was right around the beginning of the big DOJ investigation, and the attitude was pretty much "let them come!.... we've done nothing wrong, we're Microsoft!"... I attribute much of this attitude as ripple effect from execs such as Ballmer.
What is the make up of M$ strategic culture? Do they have any other strategy apart from monopolizing?
Again I worked there long ago, but I didn't sense much strategic culture, just a "We'll do what it takes to conquer" attitude. I sat in some discussions which eventually led me to leave Microsoft because I didn't feel they played fair. I've posted and commented on this before.
I found Microsoft one of the most dynamic, challenging, and fun places I've ever worked. I enjoyed the high value placed on intellectual sparring. But I finally left because, in my opinion, their intellect wasn't tempered with any humility.
As to how and whether or not they've got what it takes to "win the battle", I'd say if they started out on a level playing field they have nothing over anyone and if they didn't or wouldn't drop the hubris, they would collapse and self-destruct from their own attitude.
This may all sound a bit over the top bit it just takes one note from a very important customer to go astray and you can appreciate the need for organisation and consistency - I'm not a control freak but sticky notes are not always the best way to do things in some environments.
Well it does sound a little over the top... not because it's bad policy but more because I don't think it guarantees that one note from a very important customer still won't get lost somehow. I probably have a couple thousand "notes to self" in the form of text files laying around and I'm sure some of those are lost.
Chaos is chaos, and better tools probably just provide better chaos. And more expensive chaos. Wish I had an ultimate solution to suggest, but I've seen many sophisticated environments (e.g., Lotus Notes, PM tools, etc.) and not one has solved the "lost note" problem. Sigh.
Interesting article that raises an even more interesting issue, possibly
legal: Aren't these coders constrained by the same template IP contracts
found in most corporations today? The basic distillation of these
constraints stipulate an employee basically gives up their rights and
"software" no matter when it's written, how it's written... the company
"owns" anything said employee writes. Are these OSS coders and contributors
seeing special waivers in their employment contracts? I know the article
says the community has formal procedures in place to protect OSS IP -- but
what are those?
(I know these contracts are crap, but if they get your name in writing it
can be a can of worms to draw a bright line between things that you (the
employee) own and things they (the companies) own. I, as a contractor and
consultant, have always taken contracting agreements and added my own
modification which companies I work for must agree to before I'll sign the
contract (I'll not get into specifics) and so far I've only had one company
refuse.)
Is there empirical evidence these contributors are doing this on the up
and up? I know the OSS considers the community nothing but good,
but I have a certain lack of trust for large faceless, morally and ethically
bankrupt corporations (which includes pretty much all of them).
The money you save by not using MS will be paid ten fold down the road when the kids aren't getting an education due to a never-available and always buggy infrastructure. Let's face it, MS is the only OS that's ready for prime time in an educational setting.
I know this guy was obviously trolling.... or had some typos... to give him the benefit of the doubt, I've made appropriate corrections...
The money you save by not using anything but MS will be paid ten fold down the road when the kids aren't getting an education due to a never-available and always buggy infrastructure. Let's face it, anything but MS is the only OS that's ready for prime time in an educational setting.
I have friends for whom I've set up their Office Suite on their home computers.... I have given (installed for them) the various generations of Open Office and watched in disappointment as they repeatedly gravitated to the "free" Microsoft Works (ironic name) to create documents.
But last night, a breakthrough! My friend's daughter had written an assignment with WordPad and was having problems with it, especially wanting to spellcheck, have tighter formatting, etc. Her mom immediately imported the document into Open Office and showed her how to use THAT and told her to use Open Office as a first choice! (And this was without my "influence". In the past, to get anyone in that household to use Open Office I'd have to be there pointing it out and asking them to use it.) Reaching a tipping point, perhaps.
Some have spawned the discussion around computers and the level of realism there in Hollywood. I did find it interesting the tv show Alias often shows console displays that are clearly gnu/unix (guessing linux here)... Sure the plots are preposterous, but I give them credit at least for showing a screen where, when "hacking", the hacker at least is looking at the permissions of files in a directory using "ls -l".
I guess Hollywood thinks that most of the public are so mystified by computers that they'll believe anything.
Actually, most of the public is.... haven't you been listening? (and it's not their fault... since most of peoples' educations around computers comes from bone-headed media such as movies, the "news", etc.)
Well, maybe it's nice they're using mathematicians as consultants, but it'd be even nicer if they'd get some reality consultants, too. The show Numb3rs is embarrassing, and even more embarrassing to associate mathematicians' reputations with it. The show is smarmy, and tries way to hard to make associations of crime and such with mathematics and predictability. I gave the show 2 episodes worth of opportunity since I was intrigued by the notion, but they might as well be basing the entire premise of the show on the lemma: 1 + 1 = 3.
Of course.... this was pretty much what I would have expected from the same directory of Pay It Forward (Mimi)....
Well, I'm not even entirely through the article, but when you read something like: manage, edit, and send digital photographs using Google's Picasa software, easily the best PC photo software out there;..., the author does much to discredit him(her)self. First, there aren't many products that qualify for the descriptors "easily the best" in anything, and second Picasa isn't, (and third Google didn't even write Picasa, they purchased it). It's a great piece of software, but it ain't the best, and it ain't even close.
Google is doing some great stuff, but let's not genuflect when they sneeze.
I wouldn't consider it spam if it's a letter-writing campaign. A concerted plea from a community is the heart and soul of how a lot of things get done. Please don't associate or confuse letter-writing campaigns with advertising whores.
After all, the poster just lists an e-mail address to which you must compose your own request... it's not a click on an ASP button that generates some pre-canned spam. Heck, he doesn't even pre-populate the subject field!
Since I want it on linux.... could I have the proxy part of it on a Windows machine on my network, point to that port 9100 as a proxy for my firefox browser from my linux machine?
I've RTF(ine)A and I give... what makes this
different/better/faster/whatever than a proxy server?
And, while I'm at it.... I submit my vote that Google make linux/*nix versions
of their stuff more quickly/readily. I find it no small irony that a
company that relies on over 10,000 linux servers (actually I think the
number may exceed 40,000) essentially making them one of the largest
benficiaries of the OSS community they don't yet have a Google Desktop, nor
are offering a beta of this accelerator for the linux community.
Don't get me wrong, I like Google, think they've done great stuff, but
come on -- how about paying back a little to the hand that giveth.
(There is another post, probably more along this line.... for one and for another.)
I tend to agree people will find use for the 512M memory in video cards. Of course there's the infamous Gates quote about "noone will ever need more than...." (or words to that effect)...
I have NO idea what I'd use 512M memory for on a video card.... My first inclination might be to back up the hard drives from my first three or four PC's into the video cards memory each night;-). But I do know I'm using technology in graphics that have developed far beyond what I ever thought necessary. I remember when purchasing a computer (Ballard Computers in Washington State, now defunct) the sales rep picked out a few "candidates" for me but I had my eye on one in particular -- a PC with a 4Mb video card. The sales rep looked at me and said, "I don't know why anyone would want to buy a machine with a video card at 4Mb -- There just isn't any use at all for that kind of memory on a video card!" Needless to say, 4Mb purdy much short changes any current video cards, and the newer cards do use the memory to great effect.
Slashdot Mirror
I have enough experience with voice recognition software... and have been disappointed and pleasantly surprised at the same time. But, even at it's best I find the constraints burdensome for any day to day or common use. For restricted idiomatic uses as you pointed out speech recognition is very good, and very useful.
But, this is not what Mr. Gates said in his talk. He pretty much waved his hands and said everyone would communicate that way, and the would be the main interaction with computers. He said this in 1999, and said the transformation would essentially be complete in a couple of years. That never happened. That never even came close to happening.
Assuming all of the technical hurdles were overcome (which still have not) the transformation of interacting with computers didn't, wouldn't, and won't happen more than anything because people don't interact well with inanimate objects. It's already unnerving and distracting enough to be around people talking on headsets for cell phones -- it takes a second look to realize they're not talking to "you" or anyone around "you", but are talking to someone on the phone. It's socially weird and always will be. And in the example of cell phones, that's a person actually talking to a real other person!
Imagine an office land of cubicles where people sit and gab all day to and with their computers as a main interface. It's just not going to happen. And that social setting isn't solved by giving everyone headsets, that hasn't worked even for using phones! (Yeah, there's a such thing as call centers where everyone uses headsets, but that's their defined job, and that's just how they do it... doesn't mean people LIKE having headsets on all day.)
So, back to my main and original point in my original post..., I think Mr. Gates' motivation is way different than yours. He isn't talking about making the world a better place by making computers easier to use, he's talking about making the world a hungrier place where people continue to be coaxed into the upgrade vacuum.... with empty promises of technological nirvana...
I think the big (and dangerous to Microsoft) difference here and now is that Microsoft feels that "control of a platform" slipping from their grasp. They've lost good will from almost everyone, they no longer dominate because the Web is way too distributed for them to control by old techniques. I really think they are showing more fear now, and they turn to saying bad things (unprovable things, untrue things) about the rest of the competitive world hoping to gain purchase on their stranglehold that way. The world will end up being a better place all around if they finally lose that dominance.
From the fine article: "I've lost track of the number of times people have said the personal computer has reached its limits," said Ballmer.
Well, I've lost track of the number of times Ballmer and/or Gates has predicted the next wave in technology and were wrong.... One I found most notable was in 1999, when Gates at a keynote speech said within a couple of years, everyone would be communicating with their computers via speech. And, unless you count shouting "@(*$&#@(*&$" at a recalcitrant PC as communicating via speech, he was dead wrong.
Notable about his wrongness wasn't the "missed" prediction, in my opinion, it was how off-the-mark his vision was -- a vision easily and with little intuition would have predicted no PC/speech interaction, even if the technology completely stepped up to it (it didn't).
It seems pretty clear to me Ballmer/Gates use the bully pulpit not to make clear and visionary statements about the future, but instead to state what they want the future to be as it relates to:
Ballmer's bad-mouthing and demise-forecasting statements are more of the same. What is it with Microsoft and its leadership anyway? Nobody expects them to be patsies for the industry and its competition, but they'd earn a little more good will and respect themselves if they'd show a little for the others in the industry who have demonstrated real innovation and have contributed to the industry.
I'm probably risking troll karma with this post... but really think Ballmer, and Gates need to be called on this each time they make these public statements... Remember, Ballmer is the guy who, in reference to the DOJ investigation of their business practices said of the Attorney General (and I'll just paraphrase)..., "attorney general can go to Hell".... very rude in and of itself, and unforgivably, he used a "go to"....
Just curious, after reading the fine article, then doing a little research and reading a couple chapters of the w3c documents I wonder that anyone would change to xhtml for the sake of canonical righteousness.
Seems to me there are reasons to do xhtml... I DO like the idea of well formed objects, especially things like web pages... at least if it's well formed you've eliminated one source of nasty little bugs creeping into sites, especially sites creating pages dynamically.
But, for sites already rolled out and wrung out in public forums this seems prissy. And problematic. Consider:
I've done an informal look-around, and found some popular and quite famous (hmmmm, a particular site comes to mind...
So, academically maybe a good direction to consider, but the predictions of html going away to be supplanted by xhtml is premature, and I predict something that in our internet lifetimes will never happen.
As to how this "qualifies" as a perp walk.... you're right, it isn't.... You're right, I'm being a little dramatic. You're wrong, it is socially equivalent to a perp walk. You're escorted firmly, the "papers" in manager's hands metaphorically are the cuffs. People literally turn down an aisle as they approach, and they literally divert their eyes... they know what's happening, and they turn away.
I'd say one of the big differences between this and a perp walk is that someone doing a perp walk is supposedly at least going to get a fair trial by his or her peers. Not so for the layoffee.
What you are describing is evil.... what's more, it is illegal. Companies today pay millions to their legal staff to ensure when they do lay off that their numbers will pass legal muster, but that's about all they do. It's well documented (I can cite the research, ahem, and have done some on my own) how difficult it is to prove age discrimination, but plain and simple, this is what it is. And, it is still illegal.
I guess I get it as far as policy goes, but I experienced this a year ago from a large corporation when I got laid off... My manager came to my desk and did the perp walk with me to the office. Told me that in the interest of cutting cough costs the company was willing to offer me a one year severance package and let me go.
I said, "You're offering me a one year severance package???" He looked confused, but said, "yes".
I said, "Well then I respectfully decline your offer.... I would like to continue working for this company."
He said, "It's not optional."
I said, "Then you're not offering anything to me, you are doing something to me."
A couple of notes about the treatment therein:
In my career at this company I had received the highest award given by the company and was flown to a special ceremony to present my project and receive that award.
Bottom line here: you don't have to be a criminal, act like a criminal, or even be suspected of being a criminal to be treated like one....
First, any idea why my scroll wheel doesn't work on the referred page??? (It continues to work everywhere else, weird.)
Second, I wonder why this always starts, and is only going to be available in Europe. I know the article says:
but, this sounds like a chicken or egg, or Catch 22 scenario. How do we break that circle? Is there a way to tell HP we do want linux on a laptop? Or are we too hardy and independent a group/demographic we just insist on doing this ourselves our own way. I'd love for allRelatedly, and specifically about HP, they don't completely embrace linux yet (though I know some are going to flame me because this may be interpreted as "not about linux"). I have an HP Pavilion ZX5000 -- great little (cough) machine! I configured it dual boot with Mandrake 10.1, and paid the extra to get a Linuxant wireless driver. What a great little (cough) machine! Screen resolution 1920x1200 full color, both OS's. But, when the video connector (my diagnosis) started to loosen and my screen started to flicker I called HP for warranty repair. During the obligatory debugging phase (reboot XP, un-install, re-install video drivers, etc.) it was revealed I had a dual boot setup, and they IMMEDIATELY upon hearing I had linux on the machine refused to do the warranty repair! I escalated three times, talked to three managers and each immediately (by scanning previous call's notes) declined to do the warranty work claiming they had no assurance linux didn't damage the machine. I offered to pay for repairs should they determine in the course of fixing my machine that linux indeed was the cause. No dice.
On my fourth contact, I found a helpful person who agreed with my diagnosis, and agreed it sounded like a loose cable and agreed to do the warranty repair. She did however (bless her) advise me to remove the hard drive because upon receipt, and debugging, as soon as the technicians would see the dual boot she could not guarantee me they wouldn't immediately re-image the disk.
Bottom line, HP is dipping their toes in the linux waters, but somehow I think this community should demonstrate willingness and interest. I don't know exactly what that should be but I'm willing to participate -- any replies/suggestions -- I'm willing to try to take action.
Okay, just curious, but wondered how much of the traffic measured accounts for, knows about, figures in, etc., for Firefox "reporting in" as Internet Explorer so as not to get rejected from using that site. I have mine set to be "Internet Explorer" for my on-line banking (go figure). Think it would add any significant usage for Firefox?
I agree with Gates on one point:
I think other emerging ways to get music be they free or non-free.... they will have to become compatible with all devices, i.e., less DRM'ed, and more fair-use friendly... which iPod and iTunes is NOT. At some point there will be public awareness (am I over estimating the public's ability to figure this out?) and the public will demand more open architecture, and better quality music.
If Apple is able to sustain their dominance they'll have to do so by responding to consumers.
As for the rest of Gates' commentary, any "dominance" Microsoft reaches in cell phones/mobile technology will be achieved in the same way Microsoft has achieved dominance in their other product lines -- which means throwing money and versions at the market until something sticks... a luxury unfortunately not afforded truly creative and innovative companies.
For my own preferences I paraphrase a previous poster in a previous article thread about cell phone technology.... Give me a cell/mobile phone that has good quality voice transmission that doesn't drop calls. So far I know of no devices that meet those two simple criteria.
I once worked at Microsoft, so I will answer/reply to these as best as was my personal experience:
I found it to be muddled and lacking in direction. I gave Microsoft high grades for being rather horizontal, so you were never too far removed from important decision makers, but I found a certain neurosis in management because it always felt like there was a certain "fear factor".... i.e., fear of making a wrong move pissing off the wrong people... with whatever consequences... (for the record I wouldn't know what and if those consequences were)
The internal culture is/was as geeky as it gets. I found all around me to be highly intelligent but quite socially disconnected. The morale was generally high, but I wouldn't describe it as high because of realistic views but more from a certain hubris... e.g. (and borrowing from Lilly Tomlin) "We're Microsoft, We don't have to care!" This was right around the beginning of the big DOJ investigation, and the attitude was pretty much "let them come!.... we've done nothing wrong, we're Microsoft!"... I attribute much of this attitude as ripple effect from execs such as Ballmer.
Again I worked there long ago, but I didn't sense much strategic culture, just a "We'll do what it takes to conquer" attitude. I sat in some discussions which eventually led me to leave Microsoft because I didn't feel they played fair. I've posted and commented on this before.
I found Microsoft one of the most dynamic, challenging, and fun places I've ever worked. I enjoyed the high value placed on intellectual sparring. But I finally left because, in my opinion, their intellect wasn't tempered with any humility.
As to how and whether or not they've got what it takes to "win the battle", I'd say if they started out on a level playing field they have nothing over anyone and if they didn't or wouldn't drop the hubris, they would collapse and self-destruct from their own attitude.
Well it does sound a little over the top... not because it's bad policy but more because I don't think it guarantees that one note from a very important customer still won't get lost somehow. I probably have a couple thousand "notes to self" in the form of text files laying around and I'm sure some of those are lost.
Chaos is chaos, and better tools probably just provide better chaos. And more expensive chaos. Wish I had an ultimate solution to suggest, but I've seen many sophisticated environments (e.g., Lotus Notes, PM tools, etc.) and not one has solved the "lost note" problem. Sigh.
Interesting article that raises an even more interesting issue, possibly legal: Aren't these coders constrained by the same template IP contracts found in most corporations today? The basic distillation of these constraints stipulate an employee basically gives up their rights and "software" no matter when it's written, how it's written... the company "owns" anything said employee writes. Are these OSS coders and contributors seeing special waivers in their employment contracts? I know the article says the community has formal procedures in place to protect OSS IP -- but what are those?
(I know these contracts are crap, but if they get your name in writing it can be a can of worms to draw a bright line between things that you (the employee) own and things they (the companies) own. I, as a contractor and consultant, have always taken contracting agreements and added my own modification which companies I work for must agree to before I'll sign the contract (I'll not get into specifics) and so far I've only had one company refuse.)
Is there empirical evidence these contributors are doing this on the up and up? I know the OSS considers the community nothing but good, but I have a certain lack of trust for large faceless, morally and ethically bankrupt corporations (which includes pretty much all of them).
I know this guy was obviously trolling.... or had some typos... to give him the benefit of the doubt, I've made appropriate corrections...
I have friends for whom I've set up their Office Suite on their home computers.... I have given (installed for them) the various generations of Open Office and watched in disappointment as they repeatedly gravitated to the "free" Microsoft Works (ironic name) to create documents.
But last night, a breakthrough! My friend's daughter had written an assignment with WordPad and was having problems with it, especially wanting to spellcheck, have tighter formatting, etc. Her mom immediately imported the document into Open Office and showed her how to use THAT and told her to use Open Office as a first choice! (And this was without my "influence". In the past, to get anyone in that household to use Open Office I'd have to be there pointing it out and asking them to use it.) Reaching a tipping point, perhaps.
Some have spawned the discussion around computers and the level of realism there in Hollywood. I did find it interesting the tv show Alias often shows console displays that are clearly gnu/unix (guessing linux here)... Sure the plots are preposterous, but I give them credit at least for showing a screen where, when "hacking", the hacker at least is looking at the permissions of files in a directory using "ls -l".
Actually, most of the public is.... haven't you been listening? (and it's not their fault... since most of peoples' educations around computers comes from bone-headed media such as movies, the "news", etc.)
Well, maybe it's nice they're using mathematicians as consultants, but it'd be even nicer if they'd get some reality consultants, too. The show Numb3rs is embarrassing, and even more embarrassing to associate mathematicians' reputations with it. The show is smarmy, and tries way to hard to make associations of crime and such with mathematics and predictability. I gave the show 2 episodes worth of opportunity since I was intrigued by the notion, but they might as well be basing the entire premise of the show on the lemma: 1 + 1 = 3.
Of course.... this was pretty much what I would have expected from the same directory of Pay It Forward (Mimi)....
Well, I'm not even entirely through the article, but when you read something like: manage, edit, and send digital photographs using Google's Picasa software, easily the best PC photo software out there;..., the author does much to discredit him(her)self. First, there aren't many products that qualify for the descriptors "easily the best" in anything, and second Picasa isn't, (and third Google didn't even write Picasa, they purchased it). It's a great piece of software, but it ain't the best, and it ain't even close.
Google is doing some great stuff, but let's not genuflect when they sneeze.
This guy could probably get a job still at IBM.
'cuz if it showed up in anything other than their products, eyebrows(e) WAY up. If it just became part of IE, I wouldn't be surprised.
I wouldn't consider it spam if it's a letter-writing campaign. A concerted plea from a community is the heart and soul of how a lot of things get done. Please don't associate or confuse letter-writing campaigns with advertising whores.
After all, the poster just lists an e-mail address to which you must compose your own request... it's not a click on an ASP button that generates some pre-canned spam. Heck, he doesn't even pre-populate the subject field!
Since I want it on linux.... could I have the proxy part of it on a Windows machine on my network, point to that port 9100 as a proxy for my firefox browser from my linux machine?
I've RTF(ine)A and I give... what makes this different/better/faster/whatever than a proxy server?
And, while I'm at it.... I submit my vote that Google make linux/*nix versions of their stuff more quickly/readily. I find it no small irony that a company that relies on over 10,000 linux servers (actually I think the number may exceed 40,000) essentially making them one of the largest benficiaries of the OSS community they don't yet have a Google Desktop, nor are offering a beta of this accelerator for the linux community.
Don't get me wrong, I like Google, think they've done great stuff, but come on -- how about paying back a little to the hand that giveth.
(There is another post, probably more along this line.... for one and for another.)
I tend to agree people will find use for the 512M memory in video cards. Of course there's the infamous Gates quote about "noone will ever need more than...." (or words to that effect)...
I have NO idea what I'd use 512M memory for on a video card.... My first inclination might be to back up the hard drives from my first three or four PC's into the video cards memory each night ;-). But I do know I'm using technology in graphics that have developed far beyond what I ever thought necessary. I remember when purchasing a computer (Ballard Computers in Washington State, now defunct) the sales rep picked out a few "candidates" for me but I had my eye on one in particular -- a PC with a 4Mb video card. The sales rep looked at me and said, "I don't know why anyone would want to buy a machine with a video card at 4Mb -- There just isn't any use at all for that kind of memory on a video card!" Needless to say, 4Mb purdy much short changes any current video cards, and the newer cards do use the memory to great effect.