The trolls were doing what trolls do - but the PTO seems to be their biggest enabler and profiting in the process. Why in the world would a patent like the one cited be awarded? And now that it turns out the patent is bogus why can't the PTO be held liable for creating the mess in the first place?
...the car has to pass a test to say it is fit to drive.... I'll get a license when Microsoft passes a test to say that Windows and IE are fit to drive on the Internet.
For a moment let us ignore the roadkill from blue screens and worms by the millions; just try to get a license for IE to render any version of HTML per specifications.
AT&T's 3G network is a proven joke, but not a funny one. These 'unprintable' 'unprintable' are charging for 3G service but under-delivering a measly Edge 5 times a day, in the 21st century, in America. The Attorney Generals should be taking action and clawing money back from these crooks.
I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here, but wouldn't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent?
When MS learns how to write secure code for less money than what they offer to catch the script kiddies they would do the former. I wonder what happens to the MS coder/team that is responsible for the exploit?
I predict that:
access lists will come in play
- either implemented in the voip phone or
- offered by the voip providers
Today I can do this on my GSM phone: explicit definition of who can call me, the complement gets a fast busy, no ring on my side.
you forgot to mention the untold number of worms and other nasties that could live in a Word document. So now, on top of Microsoft Word, you have to pay the Worm tax (tm) and buy antiviral software, and update the signatures at least three times a day and twice on Sunday.
To ask the user not to click on bad URL's is to admit:
1) we (Microsoft) know what a bad url is 2) we (Microsoft) assume that you may know what a bad url is 3) but for the life of us, we (Microsoft) just can't tell IE what a bad URL is 4) we (Microsoft) give up trying to teach IE what a bad URL is 5) hence we (Microsoft) ask you to please take care and avoid bad URL links
From the original SCO press release as of 1/27/04 10:12pmEST:
"SCO announced that it is offering a reward of up to a total of $250,000".
It could be as little as $.03. I'd rather see "no less than" instead of "up to". It will be a bit more honest.
Slashdot Mirror
how about in football fields or libraries of congress?
SUN had that for years - and it didn't cost 20K and it was not limited to 10 clients either.
droboFS does not support NFS natively so UNIX integration is limited to SMB mounts - can't put /opt there
The trolls were doing what trolls do - but the PTO seems to be their biggest enabler and profiting in the process. Why in the world would a patent like the one cited be awarded? And now that it turns out the patent is bogus why can't the PTO be held liable for creating the mess in the first place?
and don't forget the 'softies too. who was funding the darlarama all this time?
...the car has to pass a test to say it is fit to drive.... I'll get a license when Microsoft passes a test to say that Windows and IE are fit to drive on the Internet.
For a moment let us ignore the roadkill from blue screens and worms by the millions; just try to get a license for IE to render any version of HTML per specifications.
AT&T's 3G network is a proven joke, but not a funny one. These 'unprintable' 'unprintable' are charging for 3G service but under-delivering a measly Edge 5 times a day, in the 21st century, in America. The Attorney Generals should be taking action and clawing money back from these crooks.
I know everyone likes to assume that Microsoft is being evil here, but wouldn't the more realistic assumption be that they were just being incompetent?
how about both?
the heading is wrong - only 70% is debited from developers
When MS learns how to write secure code for less money than what they offer to catch the script kiddies they would do the former. I wonder what happens to the MS coder/team that is responsible for the exploit?
not with google!!!
Any one of the 25000 registered viruses are.
I predict that: access lists will come in play - either implemented in the voip phone or - offered by the voip providers Today I can do this on my GSM phone: explicit definition of who can call me, the complement gets a fast busy, no ring on my side.
mod parent a troll!
Actually, you call Dell.
There is a little known but helpful corollary:
A line connecting any two pyramids will also cross at least one WalMart
I hate to gloat but there is nothing like getting hirt for a wake up call!
you forgot to mention the untold number of worms and other nasties that could live in a Word document. So now, on top of Microsoft Word, you have to pay the Worm tax (tm) and buy antiviral software, and update the signatures at least three times a day and twice on Sunday.
.aspx dude, you totally missed the point. which is: it's not about cost. it is about the ability to modify the code and do whatever one wants with it.
I think the parent has a very interesting question. What compiler does SCO use to generate their binaries?
mod down - it's a troll
To ask the user not to click on bad URL's is to admit:
1) we (Microsoft) know what a bad url is
2) we (Microsoft) assume that you may know what a bad url is
3) but for the life of us, we (Microsoft) just can't tell IE what a bad URL is
4) we (Microsoft) give up trying to teach IE what a bad URL is
5) hence we (Microsoft) ask you to please take care and avoid bad URL links
From the original SCO press release as of 1/27/04 10:12pmEST: "SCO announced that it is offering a reward of up to a total of $250,000".
It could be as little as $.03. I'd rather see "no less than" instead of "up to". It will be a bit more honest.