Lindows has to do a lot of things now: * Remarket their "new" product as it is exactly the same as the "former" one. * Because of that, change art, domainnames, etc this all costs time and money from various workers. * Buy a license for WMV (like TurboLinux did) which means a 5 of what people buy of Linspire goes directly to MS. For a # of years. Not so "pirating" (not the RIAA meaning of the word) as it was ehh..? [And that only to be able to play some videos online just because some other widiots decided they have to use _this_ format:(] * Court costs and all the legal aspects involved.
While i do not think this is $20M it'll be a bunch of money lowering what Linspire actually gains from the case. And such has been calculated in the agreement by both parties, or at least the smart minded people from both parties.
"Noones buying an xbox to use as a linux desktop machine."
Strange. I know people who did this because it was a cheap PC. They're using it for various purposes. One thing is sure: none of them is named "Noones".
As if Microsoft is the only one who defens their (ridivulous) trademarks.
What is Java? It is not 1 thing either. The name already existed for centuries as a name of an island (Indonesia IIRC)! The Island is famous of its coffee so the connection is quite already there and made. Sun sues though and tries to defend its trademark Java though as seen in recent/. news and also here
I'm not really into the subject and this may sound stupid but i read several statements R&D is strong at SUN. Why don't they use this as a service for other companies? Then they don't really have to take into account how good other similar products and SPARC lives on.
A storage method for a game console existed for years. Flash cards! And yet, when one doesn't use that but a harddrive, that's an "innovation"? It certainly ain't an invention. Innovation is a lousy buzzword anyway.
And feel free to add your contribution at nimh.org/microsoft. I tried, and failed already.
In economics, a monopoly (from the Greek monos, one + polein, to sell) is defined as a market situation where there is only one provider of a product or service. Monopoly should be distinguished from monopsony, in which there is only one buyer of the product or service. It should also, strictly, be distinguished from the (closely related) phenomenon of a cartel (which is a type of oligopoly), in which a centralized institution is set up to (partially) coordinate the actions of several independent providers ? as opposed to monopoly, in which there is one sole provider ? although, in some cases, that sole provider may have been created by consolidating several formerly independent firms
[...]
The term is sometimes (loosely) used to describe companies such as Microsoft or Standard Oil, which do face market competition, but which command a large market share and use their size to compete in ways which are considered unfair -- such as dumping products below cost to harm competitors, creating tying arrangements between their products, and other practices regulated under Antitrust law.
[...]
The Free Software Foundation ain't a company. It's a NGO.
Unrelated / i bought a FSF Europe t-shirt at FOSDEM (the one with the GPL rant on the backside) and i love it. I hope my money will be fruity for the organisation, so both parties are happy. The FSF stand was pretty much empty the whole event, which i found quite sad... and i was too shy to interview a FSF member:(
Wow! I hear this argument quite a lot, but it doesn't correlate with my personal experience and opinion during that time. I loved Netscape 3 and 4 quite a lot and found both stable. Sure, sometimes it wasn't, but mostly this was due to Windows 9x (95 OSR2).
Now, what makes me wondering is all these people who just started with PC's, Internet, and Surfing. They add to the number of users and market usage, but have they actually made a choice between several products or did they just used what was provided by their ISP CD or by Microsoft's Windows?
How was this during the time we're speaking about (96-99) and how was is this currently during past few years? IIRC, 98SE and ME came with a browser; MSIE. When there's a browser already, why install a different one?
I sure know my ISP CD came with both browsers, with Netscape recommended. Since a friend of mine also recommended Netscape, i just used that. I loved it, but years later i didn't like Netscape 6. Then i used MSIE for a small while, didn't liked it nor Microsft much, and switched to RedHat Linux (5.2, 6.0) with Mozilla M16.
The point remains, it's the new people who matter regarding marketshare, and currently they're all using Microsoft's products without learning about alternatives. A shame, for both parties involved.
Anyone here interested into veganism and also interested into contributing to a Wiki with information and recipes? I haven't set anything up yet, but i'll join this effort if it already exists and would also like to start one!
It's a nice analogy indeed, but it could be brought futher in other differences.
Definitions:
* A vegetarian does not eat products of a dead animal. * A vegan does not eat products of a living or dead animal.
Thus, the ethical people who do not eat products derived from a dead animal, but do eat products derived from a living animal, actually contribute in the exploitation that living animal as well according to ethical vegans. Which makes me wondering what's worse: a long life in torture, or a short life torture and then death? People who commit suicide/euthenasia chose, as they see their future, for the latter.
My point is.. i have no point.
Except the following to consider: do you think that eating a product from a dead animal, which contains certain unhealthy substances according to the vegetarian health-group, are NOT in products derived from these animals?
If the animal had a disease it would be in it's derived products too. Think about milk and BSE for a second.
That said, though i am prejudiced, i think an analogy based on the vegan/ethical and the vegan/health groups is a much clearer one. I could take both "technical software groups" also to a less extreme standpoint: how about an ethical shared source group?
Slashdot Mirror
Systrace, GrSecurity / PAX, ACLs are another alternative to the one you describe.
Ah yes i forgot the (potential) infringer has to distribute a similar product instead. Thanks for the clarification.
Lindows has to do a lot of things now: :(]
* Remarket their "new" product as it is exactly the same as the "former" one.
* Because of that, change art, domainnames, etc this all costs time and money from various workers.
* Buy a license for WMV (like TurboLinux did) which means a 5 of what people buy of Linspire goes directly to MS. For a # of years. Not so "pirating" (not the RIAA meaning of the word) as it was ehh..? [And that only to be able to play some videos online just because some other widiots decided they have to use _this_ format
* Court costs and all the legal aspects involved.
While i do not think this is $20M it'll be a bunch of money lowering what Linspire actually gains from the case. And such has been calculated in the agreement by both parties, or at least the smart minded people from both parties.
(Ofcourse Microsoft also has damages.)
"Noones buying an xbox to use as a linux desktop machine."
Strange. I know people who did this because it was a cheap PC. They're using it for various purposes. One thing is sure: none of them is named "Noones".
As if Microsoft is the only one who defens their (ridivulous) trademarks.
/. news and also here
p ://www.bitmover.com/lm/javaresp.html
What is Java? It is not 1 thing either. The name already existed for centuries as a name of an island (Indonesia IIRC)! The Island is famous of its coffee so the connection is quite already there and made. Sun sues though and tries to defend its trademark Java though as seen in recent
http://www.bitmover.com/lm/javaletter.html
htt
What's the red line? Where does it end???
Since Lindows^H^H^H^H^Hspire is an answer to Windows
"Linspire -- Where you want to go to today!"
"it was not the first such system, but the first designed for the mass market"
That's the difference between innovation and invention. Sun didn't invent it, but Sun did innovate it (and lots of other things) succesfully.
You can make an invention or innovation which isn't popular. Doesn't say anything about the market though.
Popularity and success are however important for profit...
I'm not really into the subject and this may sound stupid but i read several statements R&D is strong at SUN. Why don't they use this as a service for other companies? Then they don't really have to take into account how good other similar products and SPARC lives on.
A storage method for a game console existed for years. Flash cards! And yet, when one doesn't use that but a harddrive, that's an "innovation"? It certainly ain't an invention. Innovation is a lousy buzzword anyway.
And feel free to add your contribution at nimh.org/microsoft. I tried, and failed already.
Quoting Wikipedia Monopoly:
In economics, a monopoly (from the Greek monos, one + polein, to sell) is defined as a market situation where there is only one provider of a product or service. Monopoly should be distinguished from monopsony, in which there is only one buyer of the product or service. It should also, strictly, be distinguished from the (closely related) phenomenon of a cartel (which is a type of oligopoly), in which a centralized institution is set up to (partially) coordinate the actions of several independent providers ? as opposed to monopoly, in which there is one sole provider ? although, in some cases, that sole provider may have been created by consolidating several formerly independent firms
[...]
The term is sometimes (loosely) used to describe companies such as Microsoft or Standard Oil, which do face market competition, but which command a large market share and use their size to compete in ways which are considered unfair -- such as dumping products below cost to harm competitors, creating tying arrangements between their products, and other practices regulated under Antitrust law.
[...]
That's a NPOV for you!
Darl! It is you! Every click you make Every bit you take Every code you break Every ID you fake I'll be watching you...
Hey that's the same i do with those proprietary NVidia drivers. I always thought it was rather a dumb, unlogic decision.
The Free Software Foundation ain't a company. It's a NGO. Unrelated / i bought a FSF Europe t-shirt at FOSDEM (the one with the GPL rant on the backside) and i love it. I hope my money will be fruity for the organisation, so both parties are happy. The FSF stand was pretty much empty the whole event, which i found quite sad... and i was too shy to interview a FSF member :(
Wha, i heard rumors PainStation is a violent game. How about Power Pong instead (Pong on a bicycle).
Wow! I hear this argument quite a lot, but it doesn't correlate with my personal experience and opinion during that time. I loved Netscape 3 and 4 quite a lot and found both stable. Sure, sometimes it wasn't, but mostly this was due to Windows 9x (95 OSR2).
Now, what makes me wondering is all these people who just started with PC's, Internet, and Surfing. They add to the number of users and market usage, but have they actually made a choice between several products or did they just used what was provided by their ISP CD or by Microsoft's Windows?
How was this during the time we're speaking about (96-99) and how was is this currently during past few years? IIRC, 98SE and ME came with a browser; MSIE. When there's a browser already, why install a different one?
I sure know my ISP CD came with both browsers, with Netscape recommended. Since a friend of mine also recommended Netscape, i just used that. I loved it, but years later i didn't like Netscape 6. Then i used MSIE for a small while, didn't liked it nor Microsft much, and switched to RedHat Linux (5.2, 6.0) with Mozilla M16.
The point remains, it's the new people who matter regarding marketshare, and currently they're all using Microsoft's products without learning about alternatives. A shame, for both parties involved.
ource for latter: http://www.xiph.org contains that info on top of the site.
Right, if only Theora was finished already. They need your help! PS: Real's Helix Player will have Theora support.
I stopped reading GRC.com after reading this
And >= 2.2.26 fixed this also.
Hahaha. My dear AC, can you first _try_ to proof your god exists?
Anyone here interested into veganism and also interested into contributing to a Wiki with information and recipes? I haven't set anything up yet, but i'll join this effort if it already exists and would also like to start one!
It's a nice analogy indeed, but it could be brought futher in other differences.
Definitions:
* A vegetarian does not eat products of a dead animal.
* A vegan does not eat products of a living or dead animal.
Thus, the ethical people who do not eat products derived from a dead animal, but do eat products derived from a living animal, actually contribute in the exploitation that living animal as well according to ethical vegans. Which makes me wondering what's worse: a long life in torture, or a short life torture and then death? People who commit suicide/euthenasia chose, as they see their future, for the latter.
My point is.. i have no point.
Except the following to consider: do you think that eating a product from a dead animal, which contains certain unhealthy substances according to the vegetarian health-group, are NOT in products derived from these animals?
If the animal had a disease it would be in it's derived products too. Think about milk and BSE for a second.
That said, though i am prejudiced, i think an analogy based on the vegan/ethical and the vegan/health groups is a much clearer one. I could take both "technical software groups" also to a less extreme standpoint: how about an ethical shared source group?