If you're somewhere where it's acceptable to talk to somebody in person, nobody should have a problem with you talking to somebody on a cell phone.
Usually nobody would start a conversation in a place where you should keep quiet (e.g. the movies, library, etc.), but when somebody calls you on your cell phone they have no idea where you are. This is where problems come from, because some people are compelled to answer the demanding ringtone of the phone rather than miss a call by switching it off.
As for the diversity of ringtones, I think they're great. I personally use an ordinary ring, but for finding out who's really lame you can't beat the personalized ringtone!
It could be about releasing chemicals in the sea, hence the reference to "devastate jellyfish".
Man, when your eyes are open to the hidden things it's amazing what you can find.
Can you imagine the uproar that would occur if IBM lost?
I highly doubt that everybody would just give in and start paying SCO Linux licenses. There would probably be global chaos, and the US would probably be even more despised than it already is.
I think you'll find that Novell wants to succeed in business, not just make a gamble to see if it can rake in a large amount of money before its business goes under.
What company would want to be despised to the extent that SCO is? If you're into death threats, hey, go for it. Whatever floats your boat.
The Windows Installer XML (WiX - pronounced "wicks") is a toolset for advanced Windows developers that builds Windows installation packages from XML source code.
Perhaps making WiX Open Source is another tactic to get people to believe XML == open. That way, maybe people will think Microsoft is being open when it makes use of XML.
Well, there must be a reason why Microsoft is using a method that it 'openly' abhors.
Even if hardware is free, some company will come up with a TCO analysis that shows how hardware is more expensive than something more expensive than hardware.
A fuel cell generates electricity when hydrogen from fuel such as hydrogen and methanol combines with oxygen leaving pure water as a by-product.
Awesome, you can also use it as a flask.
Microsoft has it right? (no trolling intended)
on
The Paradox of Choice
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Which do you take, full freedom of choice or none whatsoever?
If you have the opportunity to choose from a great deal of options, you usually find that there are a few that are the best of the bunch, and the majority will go with those options.
This is especially true with software, except when you have a monopoly using anti-competitive practices in which to 'influence' or 'force' you to use a particular product.
Choice is good, it provides competition and allows people to decide which is best, rather than being forced to use something.
At least if choice is taken away from end-users, an elected body should decide what is or is not to be used. Decisions such as these should not be made by a monopoly. Anyway, isn't this attitude one that encourages monopolies? We all know what happens where there is no competition...
Why is this a "Troll"?
Hell, the Martians have been doing it to us for years, so why the hell wouldn't the people of Earth want to get even by using unmanned anal probes (hell, you wouldn't want to man an anal probe would you)?
This is damn serious!
You know, that reads just like some of the e-mails containing virii...
Subject: Death would also be good.
Body: I hate that fish.
Attachment: your_buckyball.pif
Re:"hazards and risks are poorly understood"
on
Buckyballs Kill Fish
·
· Score: 2, Funny
buckyballs can also steal electrons from surrounding molecules -- a process known as oxidation
So, this process of 'stealing' is referred to as 'oxidation'.
Sounds like a Microsoft buzzword, always covering over some form of villainy with a word that makes it sound less harmful - such as 'Integrated Computing'.
(Sorry, had to slip that one in. Go ahead, call me a troll. DAMN! It was worth it!)
The European Commission's order for Microsoft Corp. to ship a version of Windows without the Windows Media Player could stifle innovation and help Microsoft's rivals instead of promoting fair competition, the U.S. Department of Justice's antitrust chief said Wednesday.
Stifle innovation? How the hell does the DoJ come up with that one?
Help Microsoft's rivals? Isn't this the point? Microsoft has stifled innovation and held back competition for years, its rivals need help to overcome an anti-competitive monopoly!
Fair competition? You mean, like the way Microsoft gets to bundle all of its own middleware with Windows purely because it owns both the OS and the middleware? How fair is that? How does this help competition and innovation, where people usually stick with defaults as long as they work?
Why should removing a media player from Windows cause a problem? Like Microsoft said about its competitors, it's easy for the end user to download a media player. Or was that argument only viable when used by Microsoft in a bid to keep WMP part of the OS?
The U.S. continues to be active in its enforcement of Microsoft's compliance with the settlement and this work has resulted in substantial changes to Microsoft's business practices, according to Pate.
According to Pate? Yes, but some of us are not living in a dream world and can see that Microsoft is just as anti-competitive as ever, obviously plans to remain anti-competitive, and without the EUs input will have freedom to remain anti-competitive way into the future.
"All of Microsoft's conduct was designed to acquire and hang on to their monopoly,'' said Eugene Crew, a lawyer at Townsend, Townsend & Crew, based in San Francisco.
Many companies would desire to maintain a monopoly. The problem here is that after so many years of knowing that Microsoft has this attitude, nobody has done anything effective to stop it.
People can complain about the EU being anti-American in its anti-trust case, but personally I feel that the US should have imposed far more restrictions on Microsoft than it has thus far. Microsoft continually gets away with anti-competitive practices, everybody knows this - although some Microsoft apologists vehemently deny/excuse it.
"Consumers were harmed by being deprived of choice. The greatest harm out of the Go story was the suppression of innovation and new technology by Microsoft."
The extent of consumer harm can't really be known. People seem to be relatively happy with Windows. Then again, people just accepted that computers needed regular rebooting after running Windows 95, it just goes to show how most people just accept things without question. I guess we'll never know how far things could have progressed if it wasn't for Microsoft preventing competition by abusing its position.
Consumers are harmed, so are competing businesses.
Look how things are flying now because Microsoft has a bit of competition from Linux/Open Source. Of course, Microsoft can say, "Hey, we're doing this because we love you all, not because we're scared of Linux", but why does Microsoft care now when it obviously didn't give a damn for years (judging by the poor quality of Windows up until now)? If there's no competition then you work at your own pace, and as long as it appears that there's progress, people seem to be satisfied.
To say that I "fail to realize" is a blind assumption.
I'm well aware of what you said; however, are you saying that the only way for Microsoft to provide a file manager, help system and add/remove programs option with its OS is to integrate IE with the OS?
Perhaps you fail to realize, or ignore the fact, that this integration is one of the main things Microsoft uses as an excuse in order to maintain it's anti-competitive behavior, as in: "*whine!* We can't remove IE from the operating system, or Windows Media Player! You'll destroy Windows and make life less enjoyable for end-users!".
The question is, should Microsoft be allowed to integrate it's apps into the operating system so that the operating system becomes dependent on them? Should Microsoft be allowed this anti-competitive advantage (that it is so desperate to maintain)?
You have dependency problems with Windows too, it's just that they're anti-competitive.
I feel like I'm always repeating myself saying this, but I feel it's a good enough idea to rant about:
Windows distributions - THAT is the solution!
Take away the right for Microsoft to sell Windows with any additional software, but let a select band of 'distributors' piece together a Windows distribution made up a bare-bones Windows and whatever additional apps they like.
You could have a Windows distro which comes with IE, Firebird and Opera, or without IE at all... *cough* if you'd like that extra security.
The distributors could be overseen by legal authorities to ensure that fair play is achieved with any Windows distro.
This would not detract from the user experience in any way.
Slashdot Mirror
In soviet-russia you wouldn't complain for fear of being shot.
If you're somewhere where it's acceptable to talk to somebody in person, nobody should have a problem with you talking to somebody on a cell phone.
Usually nobody would start a conversation in a place where you should keep quiet (e.g. the movies, library, etc.), but when somebody calls you on your cell phone they have no idea where you are. This is where problems come from, because some people are compelled to answer the demanding ringtone of the phone rather than miss a call by switching it off.
As for the diversity of ringtones, I think they're great. I personally use an ordinary ring, but for finding out who's really lame you can't beat the personalized ringtone!
It could be about releasing chemicals in the sea, hence the reference to "devastate jellyfish". Man, when your eyes are open to the hidden things it's amazing what you can find.
From what I can make out, it appears to say:
i w4nt j00r m0n3y dud3!
Can you imagine the uproar that would occur if IBM lost?
I highly doubt that everybody would just give in and start paying SCO Linux licenses. There would probably be global chaos, and the US would probably be even more despised than it already is.
I think you'll find that Novell wants to succeed in business, not just make a gamble to see if it can rake in a large amount of money before its business goes under.
What company would want to be despised to the extent that SCO is? If you're into death threats, hey, go for it. Whatever floats your boat.
and it doesn't have a name change!
If you get desperate for a name change 'fix' there's always Firesomething (as mentioned here only last week - I think)...
The Windows Installer XML (WiX - pronounced "wicks") is a toolset for advanced Windows developers that builds Windows installation packages from XML source code.
Perhaps making WiX Open Source is another tactic to get people to believe XML == open. That way, maybe people will think Microsoft is being open when it makes use of XML.
Well, there must be a reason why Microsoft is using a method that it 'openly' abhors.
"It would really surprise us if SCO is already trying to breach our out-of-court settlement less than one month after signing it."
Why would that surprise anybody?
This is what SCO does. Spreading FUD almost appears to be the company's main source of income.
SCO is attempting to extort money from people. It has no proof that anybody owes the money it's claiming, and has no legal backing to claim it anyway.
SCO has just added to its crimes. When you're bad, why not be badder?
In that case, surely they shouldn't use Windows either? Wouldn't those be the type of people who would click on an attachment named 'virus.exe'?
they've even included a downloadable checklist for confused people.
What if the confused people are too confused to understand how to download it?
Even if hardware is free, some company will come up with a TCO analysis that shows how hardware is more expensive than something more expensive than hardware.
A fuel cell generates electricity when hydrogen from fuel such as hydrogen and methanol combines with oxygen leaving pure water as a by-product.
Awesome, you can also use it as a flask.
Which do you take, full freedom of choice or none whatsoever?
If you have the opportunity to choose from a great deal of options, you usually find that there are a few that are the best of the bunch, and the majority will go with those options.
This is especially true with software, except when you have a monopoly using anti-competitive practices in which to 'influence' or 'force' you to use a particular product.
Choice is good, it provides competition and allows people to decide which is best, rather than being forced to use something.
At least if choice is taken away from end-users, an elected body should decide what is or is not to be used. Decisions such as these should not be made by a monopoly. Anyway, isn't this attitude one that encourages monopolies? We all know what happens where there is no competition...
Have you been drinking too?
Why is this a "Troll"? Hell, the Martians have been doing it to us for years, so why the hell wouldn't the people of Earth want to get even by using unmanned anal probes (hell, you wouldn't want to man an anal probe would you)? This is damn serious!
I wonder if they'll launch any anal probes?
Sorry, I've been drinking.
Death would also be good. I hate that fish.
You know, that reads just like some of the e-mails containing virii...
Subject: Death would also be good.
Body: I hate that fish.
Attachment: your_buckyball.pif
buckyballs can also steal electrons from surrounding molecules -- a process known as oxidation
So, this process of 'stealing' is referred to as 'oxidation'.
Sounds like a Microsoft buzzword, always covering over some form of villainy with a word that makes it sound less harmful - such as 'Integrated Computing'.
(Sorry, had to slip that one in. Go ahead, call me a troll. DAMN! It was worth it!)
A lot less /. comments. With no microsoft to complain about, half the comments wouldn't have anything to rant about.
This is true, and I'd probably get a lot more work done.
The European Commission's order for Microsoft Corp. to ship a version of Windows without the Windows Media Player could stifle innovation and help Microsoft's rivals instead of promoting fair competition, the U.S. Department of Justice's antitrust chief said Wednesday.
Stifle innovation? How the hell does the DoJ come up with that one?
Help Microsoft's rivals? Isn't this the point? Microsoft has stifled innovation and held back competition for years, its rivals need help to overcome an anti-competitive monopoly!
Fair competition? You mean, like the way Microsoft gets to bundle all of its own middleware with Windows purely because it owns both the OS and the middleware? How fair is that? How does this help competition and innovation, where people usually stick with defaults as long as they work?
Why should removing a media player from Windows cause a problem? Like Microsoft said about its competitors, it's easy for the end user to download a media player. Or was that argument only viable when used by Microsoft in a bid to keep WMP part of the OS?
The U.S. continues to be active in its enforcement of Microsoft's compliance with the settlement and this work has resulted in substantial changes to Microsoft's business practices, according to Pate.
According to Pate? Yes, but some of us are not living in a dream world and can see that Microsoft is just as anti-competitive as ever, obviously plans to remain anti-competitive, and without the EUs input will have freedom to remain anti-competitive way into the future.
I think the EU was too lenient.
"All of Microsoft's conduct was designed to acquire and hang on to their monopoly,'' said Eugene Crew, a lawyer at Townsend, Townsend & Crew, based in San Francisco.
Many companies would desire to maintain a monopoly. The problem here is that after so many years of knowing that Microsoft has this attitude, nobody has done anything effective to stop it.
People can complain about the EU being anti-American in its anti-trust case, but personally I feel that the US should have imposed far more restrictions on Microsoft than it has thus far. Microsoft continually gets away with anti-competitive practices, everybody knows this - although some Microsoft apologists vehemently deny/excuse it.
"Consumers were harmed by being deprived of choice. The greatest harm out of the Go story was the suppression of innovation and new technology by Microsoft."
The extent of consumer harm can't really be known. People seem to be relatively happy with Windows. Then again, people just accepted that computers needed regular rebooting after running Windows 95, it just goes to show how most people just accept things without question. I guess we'll never know how far things could have progressed if it wasn't for Microsoft preventing competition by abusing its position.
Consumers are harmed, so are competing businesses.
Look how things are flying now because Microsoft has a bit of competition from Linux/Open Source. Of course, Microsoft can say, "Hey, we're doing this because we love you all, not because we're scared of Linux", but why does Microsoft care now when it obviously didn't give a damn for years (judging by the poor quality of Windows up until now)? If there's no competition then you work at your own pace, and as long as it appears that there's progress, people seem to be satisfied.
To say that I "fail to realize" is a blind assumption.
I'm well aware of what you said; however, are you saying that the only way for Microsoft to provide a file manager, help system and add/remove programs option with its OS is to integrate IE with the OS?
Perhaps you fail to realize, or ignore the fact, that this integration is one of the main things Microsoft uses as an excuse in order to maintain it's anti-competitive behavior, as in: "*whine!* We can't remove IE from the operating system, or Windows Media Player! You'll destroy Windows and make life less enjoyable for end-users!".
The question is, should Microsoft be allowed to integrate it's apps into the operating system so that the operating system becomes dependent on them? Should Microsoft be allowed this anti-competitive advantage (that it is so desperate to maintain)?
You have dependency problems with Windows too, it's just that they're anti-competitive.
I feel like I'm always repeating myself saying this, but I feel it's a good enough idea to rant about:
Windows distributions - THAT is the solution!
Take away the right for Microsoft to sell Windows with any additional software, but let a select band of 'distributors' piece together a Windows distribution made up a bare-bones Windows and whatever additional apps they like.
You could have a Windows distro which comes with IE, Firebird and Opera, or without IE at all... *cough* if you'd like that extra security.
The distributors could be overseen by legal authorities to ensure that fair play is achieved with any Windows distro.
This would not detract from the user experience in any way.
Just imagine the excitement if one of the rovers found fossilized dung.
Then there would be a race on to bring back Martian turd to earth.
That would rock!