But establishing that microsoft is a monopoly in court creates a landslide of other regulations and potential liabilities. e.g. (a) the UK and other EU governments can order products to be sold on fixed terms at a reasonable price. (b) any purchase by microsoft of other companies will be reviewed by government organisations (c) any release of a new product that is supported by the existing monopoly may be a breach of the law (d) Refusal to give vital information about microsoft API's, software code, document formats may constitute anticompetitive behaviour. & etc.
In other words 'release the slime squadrons, boys!'
It's disturbing that all those parasites are gonna feed on this ruling. At the expensive of the regular people who now not only are still forced to use Microsoft, but now have to pay the other side off as well.
The DOJ is a branch of the Executive wing of government. IOW: the DOJ is the President's organization. It's not part of the judicial or legislative branch.
Hadn't you noticed? The atrocities (i.e. Waco) and adventures of the Clinton-era DOJ came about because that was a liberal gig. Which changed when Bush came into office.
(If the tree had been elected instead things would have just rolled on the way they were. We probably would have surrendered all plans for that jet the Chinese forced down, etc. etc. McDonalds would now be a Chinese company. And we'd all be struggling to get the Windows 95 port to DR-DOS working, which would be the most 'innovative' thing Microsoft would be allowed to produce)
IBM did that very thing to India decades ago. India tried to nationalize IBM-India. IBM just pulled entirely out of the country. India has pretty much recovered from it, but it took quite awhile.
I'm not sure the BBB (bloated Brussels bureaucrats) want that kind of egg on their faces.
An interesting what-if question is to ponder what would have happened to StarOffice if Sun hadn't bought it. Was Star Division 'on the ropes' and going to go under? Where would things be if Apple, or Novell, or even Oracle had purchased it.
I can't get Java up and running on my AIX 4.3 box, which has a vintage 5-chipset POWERstation CPU, either. And I bet those people still running Linux on Netwinders are just screwed.
Where Linux is successful in large-scale rollouts, it's because the large-scale rollout is consistent unto itself.
And where Linux has serious problems is in scaling to multiple targets, and from mutliple vendors, while trying to be consistent. To run on a wide platform base, big apps have to drag along their own whole separate library suites in many instances, which means memory and resource bloat.
It would be a good thing, however, to extract from them, some promise that as Java evolves, some earlier version can be open-sourced.
How would it be a good thing to do something that will actively encourage language forks? Your 'earlier version' would be called 'Java for the ghetto' or something?
however without Linux's support Java will remain marginalized as a server-side business scripting language.
Actually, that could be rewritten as: 'without IBM's support Linux and Java will remain marginalized as server-side technology.' You see, IBM supports both Java and Linux. There are other companies 'on board' with both technologies. Collectives of 'distro maintainers' do not make the world go 'round. That might happen, but right now it's still a subculture thing.
It's 'acquire, use, use.' Because ordinary people use computers as pieces of equipment, they don't ponder much about what's inside.
In fact, most people who use computers want a consistent non-changing system that's just useful, like the copying machine or the telephone.
It's only in the mindset of the computer hobbyist and the code dabbler, who finds pleasure in messing with the guts inside, that it's a 'take take take' scenario.
Re:Fantastic!
on
Gimp Hits 2.0
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
It's ok, we have broadband (or 56k modems at the very worst).
I hope you only design pages for corporate intranets, and other environments with flat, consistent bandwidth.
Otherwise you're coming off like you don't have a clue.
You make it sound like you reboot, or at the minimum, reload your entire desktop, quite often.
A desktop should be loaded, then there should be windows open on the various virtual desktops that you look over at and say 'yeah, last Tuesday I was working on that.'
I remember once a system that I had used for a few weeks. I logged onto one of the other virtual consoles and noticed there wasn't a hostname on the prompt. I thought 'shit, the networking is screwed up.'
Then I remembered that I'd installed the system a few weeks ago and had configured and setup the network, but that that particular console prompt was from me logging before I'd configured the network.
I can't imagine flitting in and out of various Window Managers. It seems almost as distasteful as dualbooting.
If you want an OS that rides on top of Linux that provides you with a slick gui, get one. You won't then need a book.
Otherwise, this '2004' stuff implies that the gui slickness is 'progress' and that the old ways are 'backward.'
I find that offensive. If you want a good Linux reference, 'Running Linux' by Matt Welsch, in the second edition published by O'Reilly back in about 1994 is entirely filled with material that you really should have a thorough exposure to. And I saw a copy of it at Half-Price books not long ago for a dollar.
I have an AT footprint motherboard that I am about to throw on eBay. It's a 100 MHz FSB one that will take the first generation Pentium III processors.
But the cool thing to do with one of those big old tower cases would be to put an old XT motherboard in it. Done right, you'd have the space to install all four floppy drives than an early floppy controller could support. Underclock! ! !
The sad thing is, your kind of thinking has been driven out of the 'recycling' movement, which is largely a mouthpiece of the container industry.
The container industry wants us to buy aluminium from them in the form of cans, then give the cans back to them for free, and buy them again. Similarly with bottles.
In the old days 'recycling' meant such practices as returnable milk and beverage bottles. I remember the last time I brought an 8-pack of 16 ounce Pepsi bottles back to the corner market. The lady at the counter said they would take them, but that none were being delivered anymore.
Recycle doesn't mean 'shred or melt' it means re-use. And reusable means use it over again and/or refill it.
From the US Mint website. About as official as it can get:
Thomas Jefferson recommended on September 2, 1776, to the Continental Congress, that the United States adopt the silver "Spanish Milled Dollar" called "Pillar Pieces of Eight", as our monetary unit of value, since daily trade was transacted in that coin.
The Apple 1 was a circuit board. No case, and you had to come up with your own power transformer to plug into the rectifier/regulator built onto the main board. And you had to wire in your own keyboard, a parallel-strobe ASCII keyboard. Then you hooked in your video monitor.
It all sat on the table, a bare circuit board, unless you got creative, which some people did with wood.
There was no 'official' Apple 1 case. The reason they didn't ship a power transformer with the circuit board was because of weight. In that era it was expected that anybody serious about it would know where to buy their own power transformer, or have one on hand.
It wasn't at all the same company that Apple is now.
It used to be possible to say that Word files could never carry a virus, but ever since the Word Macro engine grew up into a full power Visual Basic for Applications that's not so true anymore.
I'm not sure where this 'pre-history' you refer to existed. There was a powerful VB scripting engine in Word for Windows 2.0 and that was in the early Windows 3 era.
There wasn't this problem with Word for DOS, of course, but that was the era of boot sector viruses spread with floppy diskettes.
Slashdot Mirror
You live in a fantasy world where your self-created parodies of your opponents have overshadowed reality.
Now, personally, I think thats a fine place for you to be. Keeps you out of trouble and an amusement to watch.
The cost to retailers of having to stock both with and without-remote TV sets then drives the price of all TV sets up.
Who wins in the end? The government bureaucrats who get to increase their staff to enforce the madness.
Go AFSCME! Yay!
In other words 'release the slime squadrons, boys!'
It's disturbing that all those parasites are gonna feed on this ruling. At the expensive of the regular people who now not only are still forced to use Microsoft, but now have to pay the other side off as well.
The DOJ is a branch of the Executive wing of government. IOW: the DOJ is the President's organization. It's not part of the judicial or legislative branch.
Hadn't you noticed? The atrocities (i.e. Waco) and adventures of the Clinton-era DOJ came about because that was a liberal gig. Which changed when Bush came into office.
(If the tree had been elected instead things would have just rolled on the way they were. We probably would have surrendered all plans for that jet the Chinese forced down, etc. etc. McDonalds would now be a Chinese company. And we'd all be struggling to get the Windows 95 port to DR-DOS working, which would be the most 'innovative' thing Microsoft would be allowed to produce)
AIX bundles a browser.
IBM did that very thing to India decades ago. India tried to nationalize IBM-India. IBM just pulled entirely out of the country. India has pretty much recovered from it, but it took quite awhile.
I'm not sure the BBB (bloated Brussels bureaucrats) want that kind of egg on their faces.
An interesting what-if question is to ponder what would have happened to StarOffice if Sun hadn't bought it. Was Star Division 'on the ropes' and going to go under? Where would things be if Apple, or Novell, or even Oracle had purchased it.
I can't get Java up and running on my AIX 4.3 box, which has a vintage 5-chipset POWERstation CPU, either. And I bet those people still running Linux on Netwinders are just screwed.
The same logic applies to Linux.
Where Linux is successful in large-scale rollouts, it's because the large-scale rollout is consistent unto itself.
And where Linux has serious problems is in scaling to multiple targets, and from mutliple vendors, while trying to be consistent. To run on a wide platform base, big apps have to drag along their own whole separate library suites in many instances, which means memory and resource bloat.
It would be a good thing, however, to extract from them, some promise that as Java evolves, some earlier version can be open-sourced.
How would it be a good thing to do something that will actively encourage language forks? Your 'earlier version' would be called 'Java for the ghetto' or something?
however without Linux's support Java will remain marginalized as a server-side business scripting language.
Actually, that could be rewritten as: 'without IBM's support Linux and Java will remain marginalized as server-side technology.' You see, IBM supports both Java and Linux. There are other companies 'on board' with both technologies. Collectives of 'distro maintainers' do not make the world go 'round. That might happen, but right now it's still a subculture thing.
....during peak of activity in AU timezone.
'nuff said?
Not really 'take take take.'
It's 'acquire, use, use.' Because ordinary people use computers as pieces of equipment, they don't ponder much about what's inside.
In fact, most people who use computers want a consistent non-changing system that's just useful, like the copying machine or the telephone.
It's only in the mindset of the computer hobbyist and the code dabbler, who finds pleasure in messing with the guts inside, that it's a 'take take take' scenario.
It's ok, we have broadband (or 56k modems at the very worst).
I hope you only design pages for corporate intranets, and other environments with flat, consistent bandwidth.
Otherwise you're coming off like you don't have a clue.
You make it sound like you reboot, or at the minimum, reload your entire desktop, quite often.
A desktop should be loaded, then there should be windows open on the various virtual desktops that you look over at and say 'yeah, last Tuesday I was working on that.'
I remember once a system that I had used for a few weeks. I logged onto one of the other virtual consoles and noticed there wasn't a hostname on the prompt. I thought 'shit, the networking is screwed up.'
Then I remembered that I'd installed the system a few weeks ago and had configured and setup the network, but that that particular console prompt was from me logging before I'd configured the network.
I can't imagine flitting in and out of various Window Managers. It seems almost as distasteful as dualbooting.
Linuxconf was a broken toy in 1994. The predecessor of all the broken toys that have come in to replace it.
vi is your friend, and a foot or two of OReilly books that don't even have to mention Linux anywhere in them is your friend, too.
If you want an OS that rides on top of Linux that provides you with a slick gui, get one. You won't then need a book.
Otherwise, this '2004' stuff implies that the gui slickness is 'progress' and that the old ways are 'backward.'
I find that offensive. If you want a good Linux reference, 'Running Linux' by Matt Welsch, in the second edition published by O'Reilly back in about 1994 is entirely filled with material that you really should have a thorough exposure to. And I saw a copy of it at Half-Price books not long ago for a dollar.
That looks to me like a wooden box that somebody stuck a plastic/metal case inside.
I have an AT footprint motherboard that I am about to throw on eBay. It's a 100 MHz FSB one that will take the first generation Pentium III processors.
But the cool thing to do with one of those big old tower cases would be to put an old XT motherboard in it. Done right, you'd have the space to install all four floppy drives than an early floppy controller could support. Underclock! ! !
The sad thing is, your kind of thinking has been driven out of the 'recycling' movement, which is largely a mouthpiece of the container industry.
.
The container industry wants us to buy aluminium from them in the form of cans, then give the cans back to them for free, and buy them again. Similarly with bottles.
In the old days 'recycling' meant such practices as returnable milk and beverage bottles. I remember the last time I brought an 8-pack of 16 ounce Pepsi bottles back to the corner market. The lady at the counter said they would take them, but that none were being delivered anymore.
Recycle doesn't mean 'shred or melt' it means re-use. And reusable means use it over again and/or refill it.
But enough preachy talk. .
Yeah, but the rich liberals who donate to the Sierra Club have vacation homes out in the nice woods. . .
From the US Mint website. About as official as it can get:
Thomas Jefferson recommended on September 2, 1776, to the Continental Congress, that the United States adopt the silver "Spanish Milled Dollar" called "Pillar Pieces of Eight", as our monetary unit of value, since daily trade was transacted in that coin.
I didn't see 'Mexico' in there anywhere.
The Apple 1 was a circuit board. No case, and you had to come up with your own power transformer to plug into the rectifier/regulator built onto the main board. And you had to wire in your own keyboard, a parallel-strobe ASCII keyboard. Then you hooked in your video monitor.
It all sat on the table, a bare circuit board, unless you got creative, which some people did with wood.
There was no 'official' Apple 1 case. The reason they didn't ship a power transformer with the circuit board was because of weight. In that era it was expected that anybody serious about it would know where to buy their own power transformer, or have one on hand.
It wasn't at all the same company that Apple is now.
Everybody knows that it was originally the Harvard Lampoon.
And a fine silver-spoon tradition it is for idle rich boys to frolic around and satirize the world.
It used to be possible to say that Word files could never carry a virus, but ever since the Word Macro engine grew up into a full power Visual Basic for Applications that's not so true anymore.
I'm not sure where this 'pre-history' you refer to existed. There was a powerful VB scripting engine in Word for Windows 2.0 and that was in the early Windows 3 era.
There wasn't this problem with Word for DOS, of course, but that was the era of boot sector viruses spread with floppy diskettes.