According to Finnish newspaper Helsingin Sanomat, Elop wasn't allowed to trade the shares. Nokia informed the paper that after Elop started planning the co-operation with Microsoft, trading away the Microsoft stock and buying Nokia stock instead would have been considered illegal due to insider information.
A poor translation of the article is as follows:
On Saturday, Nokia informed Helsingin Sanomat that the CEO of Nokia, Stephen Elop, doesn't own any Nokia shares yet due to stock market regulations. The same reason has prevented Elop from selling his remaining Microsoft shares.
Stock market regulations prevent company insiders from using unreleased insider information in their trades. According to Nokia's interpretation, the changes in strategy that Elop planned were considered insider information until last Friday.
When Elop started his work on 21st of September, he also started to plan the new strategy. Nokia informed the because of this, Elop hasn't been able to buy shares.
According to Nokia, Elop had to stop selling his Microsoft shares last year for the same reason. According to Nokia's information, Elop was able to sell 60 percent of his Microsoft shares which means he still has 40 percent left to sell.
Elop stopped selling his Microsoft shares when significant co-operation with Microsoft was brought into the plans.
Nokia doesn't publish the date when that happened, but according to information from Nasdaq, Elop sold 23 000 Microsoft shared on the last day of previous August.
And continue paying them forever in the future? I think the point of lawsuits is to get a favorable ruling(s), so that tackling them in the future will be easier. And besides, if MS just started paying them all off, wouldn't that just encourage the practice even more?
Even if Microsoft isn't the most ethical company, it doesn't change the fact that this can be a Good Thing.
It may not be important for *you* to know how to make friends, but it helps to understand how humans generally act in social situation. There are variety of ways to use this kind of information to help people have better lives, therapy being most notable.
Say what you will, but humans are automatons to certain extent, enough to have predictable behavioral patterns.
According to the article, Universal tube seems to be willing to move to a new domain (provided that Youtube pays the expenses). I don't see why they couldn't simply sell the utube.com to the highest bidder and get rid of it. I'm sure a domain with 60+ million hits a month is worth quite a lot.
Or maybe they are just trying to get few extra bucks from Google's pocket too.
So Wii wont be getting ports that probably wouldn't work very well anyway due to the controller scheme? I would have expected that the controller is much more of a problem than the power. Nintendo has never really thrived on ports anyway. Best games on my Nintendo games collection have always been exclusives.
I, for one, wait Wii for the games designed FOR Wii. Isn't that the whole point of Wii anyway?
For the very simple reason of average users. I'm not saying average user is too stupid to use bit torrent clients, but it's too bothersome. Torrent downloads are becoming more and more used over the web as means of downloading, so it is only natural that browsers would integrate this feature. Why burden normal users with need to get extra software for torrents, when the browser itself could already handle it?
Considering Opera's market share, the feature is not that revolutionary, but it's the first step. Next I would like to see both FF and IE to integrate torrent downloading capability to their browsers. Wouldn't hurt with the general attitudes against P2P either.
People use Windows out of necessity (generally speaking). If anything, Microsoft can not afford to lose it's monopoly. If this is the price they have to pay for it, then they will obey.
You see, if Microsoft took out it's business (or started pulling some stupid stuff) from EU, that would mean that people have to adapt to other operating systems. Once large number of Europeans switch their operating system to something else than Windows, it would also mean that other operating systems become viable platforms to develop for, and we would probably see a huge rise in cross platform programs.
Increase of cross platform software accomppanied with better support for other platforms would mean that suddenly people don't need to use Windows anymore. It wouldn't just mean that they lose their european markets, but they would lose market all around the world, because other operating systems become good options for companies and individuals.
Thus, Microsoft simply can not afford to lose it's monopoly and they are probably willing to spend a lot of money to maintain it, if they have to.
Opera stores the history in memory to allow the fast back button (like FF nowdays). Opera might be more of a memory hog in this situation than other browsers, but Opera has also mentioned that they handle memory in more dynamic way than other browsers. If there is plenty of free memory around, Opera will use it to make browsing faster and more enjoyable. If the amount of free memory decreases, Opera will also lower the usage.
When I'm doing memory intensive operations, I've never fealt that Opera had noticably lost to any other browser. But when it comes to just browsing, Opera gives me the best performance. When there is still 400mb of free memory, what does it matter if Opera is taking more than 100mb memory with just 3 pages open?
I'd say a lot more than just a few years, unless something unusual happens, considering that I'm still happily using Windows 2000, and Age of Empires 3 was the first game to refusing installing/working because I didn't have XP.
Microsoft will probably be the first to drop support, but for other developers, I expect I can continue using my Windows 2000 for a few more years, at least. I doubt that Microsoft really expects huge sales from PC Halo 2. So, for the few that really want it, they can double the their result by "artificially" limiting Halo to Vista.
But of course the article is right too... It is only matter of time before support is dropped for XP. I mean, I doubt people buy Windows 95 for their new computers, these days. But I don't think it will be up to Microsoft to force gaming people on Vista. They aren't the only company making games.
And you seem to be forgetting that the "RPG" is preceeded by "MMO", as do many others.
What is beyond my comprehension is that why do people buy a Multiplayer game, when they obviously do not wish to play with other people? Did you buy it because others did? Did you buy it because of all the hype? Did you buy it because it's Warcraft? If you did, then I'm afraid you have no place to complain.
I, for one, bought WoW fully aware of the fact that I was buying a multiplayer game, not an online single player game. I expected that any "real" content of the game would require cooperation with other players. Getting into a good reputable guild was not on option, it was a must.
I do understand the argument that casuals don't have enough time to team up, as it does indeed sometimes take a ridiculously large amount of time to set something up, such as a raid or getting into a battleground. But I must apologize, I simply do not understand the argument that you do not wish to team up in a multiplayer game.
And in the other news today, new variant of the Beagle virus, Beagle.goatse, opens a easily abusable back door in your system. However, so far it seems that hackers have been unwilling to use this hole to breach into our computer.
Pfft, this is old news. Every Finn out there already knows that IRC is not good for your health, like all other drugs. I mean, it was portrayed in a documentary series each episode featuring different kind of drug. Come to think of it, IRC was propably the worst one, because it was the introduced in first episode.
The show was very creditable and informative. It even had elite hackers compiling kernels just to make a lot of green text roll trough fast. It even featured an anonymous coward telling how he made it out of the hook, but his friend couldn't make it...
Slashdot Mirror
According to Finnish newspaper Helsingin Sanomat, Elop wasn't allowed to trade the shares. Nokia informed the paper that after Elop started planning the co-operation with Microsoft, trading away the Microsoft stock and buying Nokia stock instead would have been considered illegal due to insider information.
A poor translation of the article is as follows:
Are there still sites out there that don't do this? Really?
Unfortunately, yes.
So, why doesn't the government simply pay them, then track them down for assassination and release photos of their bullet ridden corpses?
Human rights, maybe?
And continue paying them forever in the future? I think the point of lawsuits is to get a favorable ruling(s), so that tackling them in the future will be easier. And besides, if MS just started paying them all off, wouldn't that just encourage the practice even more?
Even if Microsoft isn't the most ethical company, it doesn't change the fact that this can be a Good Thing.
With the country's software locked to Windows and Internet explorer, is this honestly a big surprise?
It may not be important for *you* to know how to make friends, but it helps to understand how humans generally act in social situation. There are variety of ways to use this kind of information to help people have better lives, therapy being most notable.
Say what you will, but humans are automatons to certain extent, enough to have predictable behavioral patterns.
According to the article, Universal tube seems to be willing to move to a new domain (provided that Youtube pays the expenses). I don't see why they couldn't simply sell the utube.com to the highest bidder and get rid of it. I'm sure a domain with 60+ million hits a month is worth quite a lot.
Or maybe they are just trying to get few extra bucks from Google's pocket too.
I think it's the main page story on Slashdot that makes the server admins scream in terror.
So Wii wont be getting ports that probably wouldn't work very well anyway due to the controller scheme? I would have expected that the controller is much more of a problem than the power. Nintendo has never really thrived on ports anyway. Best games on my Nintendo games collection have always been exclusives.
I, for one, wait Wii for the games designed FOR Wii. Isn't that the whole point of Wii anyway?
For the very simple reason of average users. I'm not saying average user is too stupid to use bit torrent clients, but it's too bothersome. Torrent downloads are becoming more and more used over the web as means of downloading, so it is only natural that browsers would integrate this feature. Why burden normal users with need to get extra software for torrents, when the browser itself could already handle it?
Considering Opera's market share, the feature is not that revolutionary, but it's the first step. Next I would like to see both FF and IE to integrate torrent downloading capability to their browsers. Wouldn't hurt with the general attitudes against P2P either.
People use Windows out of necessity (generally speaking). If anything, Microsoft can not afford to lose it's monopoly. If this is the price they have to pay for it, then they will obey.
You see, if Microsoft took out it's business (or started pulling some stupid stuff) from EU, that would mean that people have to adapt to other operating systems. Once large number of Europeans switch their operating system to something else than Windows, it would also mean that other operating systems become viable platforms to develop for, and we would probably see a huge rise in cross platform programs.
Increase of cross platform software accomppanied with better support for other platforms would mean that suddenly people don't need to use Windows anymore. It wouldn't just mean that they lose their european markets, but they would lose market all around the world, because other operating systems become good options for companies and individuals.
Thus, Microsoft simply can not afford to lose it's monopoly and they are probably willing to spend a lot of money to maintain it, if they have to.
Opera stores the history in memory to allow the fast back button (like FF nowdays). Opera might be more of a memory hog in this situation than other browsers, but Opera has also mentioned that they handle memory in more dynamic way than other browsers. If there is plenty of free memory around, Opera will use it to make browsing faster and more enjoyable. If the amount of free memory decreases, Opera will also lower the usage.
When I'm doing memory intensive operations, I've never fealt that Opera had noticably lost to any other browser. But when it comes to just browsing, Opera gives me the best performance. When there is still 400mb of free memory, what does it matter if Opera is taking more than 100mb memory with just 3 pages open?
I'd say a lot more than just a few years, unless something unusual happens, considering that I'm still happily using Windows 2000, and Age of Empires 3 was the first game to refusing installing/working because I didn't have XP.
Microsoft will probably be the first to drop support, but for other developers, I expect I can continue using my Windows 2000 for a few more years, at least. I doubt that Microsoft really expects huge sales from PC Halo 2. So, for the few that really want it, they can double the their result by "artificially" limiting Halo to Vista.
But of course the article is right too... It is only matter of time before support is dropped for XP. I mean, I doubt people buy Windows 95 for their new computers, these days. But I don't think it will be up to Microsoft to force gaming people on Vista. They aren't the only company making games.
And you seem to be forgetting that the "RPG" is preceeded by "MMO", as do many others.
What is beyond my comprehension is that why do people buy a Multiplayer game, when they obviously do not wish to play with other people? Did you buy it because others did? Did you buy it because of all the hype? Did you buy it because it's Warcraft? If you did, then I'm afraid you have no place to complain.
I, for one, bought WoW fully aware of the fact that I was buying a multiplayer game, not an online single player game. I expected that any "real" content of the game would require cooperation with other players. Getting into a good reputable guild was not on option, it was a must.
I do understand the argument that casuals don't have enough time to team up, as it does indeed sometimes take a ridiculously large amount of time to set something up, such as a raid or getting into a battleground. But I must apologize, I simply do not understand the argument that you do not wish to team up in a multiplayer game.
And in the other news today, new variant of the Beagle virus, Beagle.goatse, opens a easily abusable back door in your system. However, so far it seems that hackers have been unwilling to use this hole to breach into our computer.
Pfft, this is old news. Every Finn out there already knows that IRC is not good for your health, like all other drugs. I mean, it was portrayed in a documentary series each episode featuring different kind of drug. Come to think of it, IRC was propably the worst one, because it was the introduced in first episode.
The show was very creditable and informative. It even had elite hackers compiling kernels just to make a lot of green text roll trough fast. It even featured an anonymous coward telling how he made it out of the hook, but his friend couldn't make it...