I have some experience working with companies like Citibank in the debit/credit business.
What I found is that in some instances, data is very well protected and they do an excellent job following the letter and spirit of the regulations.
What happens though is that there are other areas of a company that are authorized users of the priviledged data that don't require the same burdensome security procedures. They have their own business unit with their own procedures and never the two business units shall meet.
When I read things like this it reminds me of the classic Microsoft, "ours will be better" BS they crank out to make consumers believe it is wise to wait to buy their newest line extension.
I also don't believe Intel is going to "give" something to Apple just to keep them as a customer. Would a company that has gotten to be the size of Intel give an important technology to one customer (Apple) when they can make far more money selling it to all customers?
I (boldly/foolishly) predict the administration tools won't get open-sourced. Because there is way more value (to PHB's) in delivering point-and-click GUI admin than just foo.conf admin. That there might really be IP issues will be the official reason for keeping it proprietary.
/.'s hate the marketers, but it seems to me it would be easier to administer the funds in a very accountable fashion (reciepts) by supporting marketing open source projects.
Example: The Foo project applies for marketing funds to pay for part of a booth at Linux World. Foo project is approved for X dollars and has to produce reciepts accordingly in order to get their grant after the trip.
The company I work for has a powerpoint presentation online. There is are no animations, no special transitions, just slides with pretty pictures and some words.
The PHB thinks -any- browser reads HTML and they have a "save as" dialog box for exactly this. So, what's the problem?
Non-IE browsers get a pop-up window telling them "This presentation contains content that your browser may not be able to show properly. This presentation was optimized for more recent versions of Microsoft Internet Explorer."
If their open formats are not implemented like my example then MS Management has accepted there's a huge OSS weakness that they have yet to exploit. Maybe they make the open file format license revokable. Besides the obvious IP issues, what could it be?
Funny you should say that. Cell phones have the capacity to carry electronic cash. The sim card has more than enough security-related stuff to do it.
It would work something like this: -Dial a number, machine voice asks you to enter the amount you want loaded onto the phone. -Punch 20 for $20.00 machine voice confirms $20 and asks for PIN. $20 is now "on" your cell phone. -A payments back-end handles the messy transaction clearing with the bank.
Merchant Transaction: -Each merchant has their own phone number to call to make a transaction. Clerk enters your phone number hits "ok". -Server waits for you to dial in. Can authenticate your phone well because of the SIM capabilities. -Checks balance, verifies payment amount and asks for PIN. -Deducts what the merchant's POS requests.
Basically takes the same payments backend as itunes. No Visa/Mastercard necessary, but you still have to get on the bank's transaction clearing.
There's POS -software- integration, but you would start with the big, centralized POS retailers who can pull this off. No POS hardware changes anyway.
I can't believe I'm the first one to think of this though. The idiots at Cingular, T-Mobile are too big and slow to see how close they are to a fscking gold-mine. I wonder if anyone can tell me if it's possible to do it without some cooperation from them. (needs crypto)
Well, you are doing it right then. That's a very good lesson about the current economic reality of some OSS software.
BTW, I have to laugh when a company won't pay for a simple support call. As you probably know the engineer wastes 3x-4x times the money in time searching for a solution.
Wow. There are just soo many different ways this post is wrong wrong wrong.
1. Europe is Economically Unhealthy I'd argue that they are doing just the opposite. Streamlining markets, simplfying trade, lowering tariffs. If they can keep the IP free, then they will really be into somethings. You've heard of the EU right? It may not be happening quickly, but there's no doubt it's changing.
2. Europe is "losing" to the US No. I'd argue that currently both the EU and US are both constantly struggling to maintain GDP growth and maintain high(er)employment. This is not "losing." See #1 for why the EU's growth opportunities are very good. That you think the U.S. is somehow winning shows how much of the USA-is-#1 crack you smoke. It's 2005, not 1950.
3. Subsidies EU-Yes US-no. This is plain wrong. The American economy is subsidized in -many- ways. They simply aren't as obvious to you.
Please turn off the Fox News and learn a few *-facts-* regarding how the American economy operates.
1. If you have other companies distributing your IP in a non-compliant manner, this would be a great time to "Lawyer-Up" and penalize the offenders. This truely is the American way.
2. If I was talented enough to write something Apache wanted I'd modify the project somewhat and sell the modified version to Apache. I can see some very nice annual license and support dollars. If they don't buy, then they don't want it enough. End of story.
3. Don't want to give support away? How about charging for support? $35 per support issue. Maybe an annual subscription price for those with deep pockets.
It sounds to me like you have made something great, but don't want to deal with the new issues that come out of being successful. That's okay, but don't complain.
I love a chance to work on a project where the world is beating a path to your door. Contact me if you need help.
When I used to look at this kind of information, the explanation went something like this:
-The information used to make up these market share numbers are generally reported by retailers/resellers. In this case, maybe they get some data from system integrators or from companies like IBM who deploy these things. -Those numbers are aggregated and then estimates are added for channels they don't have good numbers for.
1. Compliments on Sarge. I use Sarge for a desktop over the last 6 months and am quite satisified. Yeah, it's not -perfect-, but no show-stopper problems and whatever issues I find get fixed quickly. Big thanks to Debian volunteers. When it hits stable it will be even better!
2. Dumb Server Question For desktops, there seem to be a couple of debian-based projects like Ubuntu. Are there similar server-specific projects or even a sub-project that sticks close to Debian? I'm aware of Adamantix, (which I couldn't get to install) but not others.
There are weaknesses with these value statements that are easy to exploit by MS.
-Stability and Usability are pretty much there for the average XP/2000 desktop user on MS. They don't know any better and tend to be satisfied. In the server world, it's a different game. The places I have worked tend to be small and they rely exclusively on M$ products in the back room. It's like the devil they know. (because they advertise/use M$ on the desktop...)
-The apps to open these proprietary files comes on most new PC's. The perception is that everyone has the applications to open these files.
-Most of us desire wealth and power. Imperialism is wealth and power on steroids. In a funny way, Americans like to be ruled too. So DRM lock-in makes users feel safer. So, arguing against either is not the smartest way to go.
Linux is great. It's a huge threat to M$'s wealth and M$ knows it. It's missing a killer something though. Something that redefines the marketplace. I'd love to hear some ideas because I want to put it into words. Feel free to email me to discuss further.
This the kind of BS that they will use to claim "PronHorn is more secure!!!" The reality of this would go something like:
1. Set up weak boxes 2. Send them to questionable sites. 3. Watch them get infected. 4. Figure out how they got infected. 5. Report how they got infected.
Then A. Do nothing, there's "no budget" to fix the problems. (very likely) B. Modify the code -just- enough to get rid of the worst offenders. (least likely) C. Charge the end-user a subscription to "protect" them from threats found in their research with another enterprise software package. (my choice as most likely)
In the end Microsoft says, "We've committed billions to increased security in pronhorn. It's more usable and real secure and "just works." Apply more anti-competitive practices liberally and maintain monopoly.
What bugs me the most is it will sound like it's true and kill Linux adoption. But the security patches will just keep coming.
It wasn't so long ago (months?) that inmates were dying at a rather alarming rate in L.A. Sheriff's jails too. I wish I had a link, but it was very news-worthy on LA public radio. (KPCC covers L.A. news great) The phrase "Sheriff's excessive use of force" never quite stuck.
I wonder what the resource requirements are for a system that "tracks convicts wherever they go in real-time" claim. Presumably thousands of reader devices always on and connected to some server. Is there a database backend? Or, does it just store locations temporarily. Could you/. the server connected to the network of readers?
Yeah, he's starting a flamefest, but take a moment to look at it from his perspective:
-Dvorak needs to generate traffic and the old-style of technology reporting is not doing it. He can't just write about new technology any more because fewer people are reading that.
-Dvorak gets his ideas for stories from PR people. The PR hacks are still trying to give him "new technology" stories that don't generate traffic. This is the high-paid variety of PR reps, so we're talking MS, Adobemedia, Intuit. And what's really new from them anyway?
-Dvorak doesn't want to know about Linux because MS has indirectly paid his bills for so long he can't tell which way the wind is blowing.
-Linux is not ready for guys like Dvorak and WSJ Mossberg (sp?) IMHO they tend to be the last one's give a technology a positive review after so many others of their peers have already done so. Linux also needs a high-paid PR company and deep-pockets advertising budget to convert guys like Dvorak. By then, Microsoft will probably have it's own Linux distro.
This is really good news though. It means that the "Linux story" is going way up the media chain. It's really different and powerful. Otherwise, it wouldn't have warranted a single comment from Dvorak.
I have a controversial response to the part-line 'ain't gonna happen" comments.
1. Both Microsoft and Red Hat are under a great deal of pressure to deliver profits.
2. Currently, innovation is not coming at the pace that it did in the 90's. In any publicly traded industry, this leads to consolidation. (AdobeMedia anyone?)
3. Price of both companies shares has stagnated. This generally fuels consolidation because shareholders demand high profits.
4. Red Hat is not as cash-rich as MS, but they are the -clear- leader in enterprise linux.
The acquisition would be good for Microsoft. -They buy the undisputed leader in the segment -Make Red Hat the red-headed step-child in terms of price and service to Winblows server. This crushes the Sun and Novell Linux strategy and puts them in-play versus IBM. -Fire most of Red Hat's engineers to keep the business profitable at rock-bottom prices, maintain the distro and stifle competitive innovation.
Now, the humans running MS would likely be mortally opposed to it as many have pointed out. And from a common-sense perspective it should qualify as anti-competitive, but the legal world doesn't run on common sense.
From a Microsoft business perspective, it is a -great- idea.
As enticing as it may sound to the movie studios, they would have a whole bunch of trust and cost issues:
1. A contactless crypto microprocessor smart card would set an OEM back likely $25/card for small quantities. If they want security printing, add another $20.
2. Who are you going to trust to issue the cards?
3. What happens when the DRM is cracked? Do I hand in my card for another? Talk about a logistics and cost-sink nightmare....
4. DVD player manufacturers won't like it either. The basic idea being, you want me to add a DRM engine to my already tiny-margin product?????
5. Unless the DVD standards companies get behind it, it's a good intellectual exercise.
The way they were made safer was through regulation, not self-motivated sense of "let's do this to gain some kind of competitive edge.", or "to protect consumers.." kind of arguements.
Then, when they were regulated into providing safer cars, the price of cars went up to pay for safety R&D. How much they went up doesn't matter.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I hardly think the current American political environment would support regulating MS.
Microsoft costs you every month: The average american (including PHB's) won't care. Microsoft will be the equivalent of a cable tv monopoly. There's a base package (the OS), extra for HDTV (antivirus), extra for Pron channels (Pron) that consumers gladly pay each month now.
The worst thing that can come out of it for Microsoft is the equivalent of what some consumers do now. Which is buy the Tivo separately at Worst Buy. Who cares?
Yeah, but you and a whole lot of other people watched it right?
That's all Microsoft wanted, and they got it. Judging by the number of comments that mention details from the event on/. alone I'd say that Microsoft couldn't be happier.
Based on what I've read, this thing was the worst kept secret in gaming. Why waste time watching?/.'s could have guessed it was going to be all filler anyway.
Slightly OT: I wonder who got paid the most out of the event. Did M$ get a cut of the commercials? Did MTV charge MS to do it?
Stories like this only hurt M$ alternatives. Here's how I see it:
1. Media constantly searches for new stories to entice readers to look at ads. 2. To entice readers to look at ads, writers build tension. In this case, the hero (big advertising $$ Microsoft) is being "challeneged" by other market participants. It doesn't matter how they define the issues, there's a challenge. This builds tension and a sense of excitement. 3. Microsoft finally releases something new(ish) and the writer proclaims, "Microsoft destroys its enemies! Our hero lives another day!!!" To the great pleasure of readers, Microsoft and the media outlet who just got you to look at more ads.
I think M$ competitors are willing participants because they get "some" press, but they are playing a losing game unless they can come up with more advertising dollars than Microsoft.
I'd like to know if anyone has a strategy to break this cycle. Other than IBM's mega-bucks linux ad campaigns, I don't know where to begin.
Please tell me why not being able to substantiate non-fact-related parts of a story is a big deal? Moreover, if it is such a small number of stories, then why is it -so- bad?
I hardly believe she is the first to do this.
So what's going on with the parties in the story that is not being addressed?
1. Yes I do own a Thinkpad and its grrreat! 2. Paranoid and xenophobic? No.
If Lenovo is -so- great, wouldn't there be more China-based companies as viable tier-1 American competitors since most laptops come from China anyway? Well, where are they?
Chinese manufacturers have a different business culture that does not exactly mirror expensive American ideals like Quality and Service. Fox News would report that difference as "Chinese Products Suck! Stay Tuned!!!" Watching Fox is probably how you learned it's acceptable to be an adult and think like a child.
How about turning off Fox News and consider that there are cultural differences that make it very difficult to sell products into another culture that has a different sense of product value.
Slashdot Mirror
I have some experience working with companies like Citibank in the debit/credit business.
What I found is that in some instances, data is very well protected and they do an excellent job following the letter and spirit of the regulations.
What happens though is that there are other areas of a company that are authorized users of the priviledged data that don't require the same burdensome security procedures. They have their own business unit with their own procedures and never the two business units shall meet.
When I read things like this it reminds me of the classic Microsoft, "ours will be better" BS they crank out to make consumers believe it is wise to wait to buy their newest line extension.
I also don't believe Intel is going to "give" something to Apple just to keep them as a customer. Would a company that has gotten to be the size of Intel give an important technology to one customer (Apple) when they can make far more money selling it to all customers?
I think this move by Red Hat is trying to lock-out free-as-in-beer Linux.
Before I get modded down:
-Red Hat will continue to contribute to Linux.
-Red Hat will still promote most things good for Linux as in patents and other IP issues.
I think they are becoming as proprietary as possible. For example, they recently open-sourced the Fedora Directory Project. http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Main_Page
I (boldly/foolishly) predict the administration tools won't get open-sourced. Because there is way more value (to PHB's) in delivering point-and-click GUI admin than just foo.conf admin. That there might really be IP issues will be the official reason for keeping it proprietary.
/.'s hate the marketers, but it seems to me it would be easier to administer the funds in a very accountable fashion (reciepts) by supporting marketing open source projects.
Example: The Foo project applies for marketing funds to pay for part of a booth at Linux World. Foo project is approved for X dollars and has to produce reciepts accordingly in order to get their grant after the trip.
It took me 3 clicks from google using "los angeles "computer recycling"" to this link http://www.lacity.org/SAN/ewaste.htm
The city also sends notices around when they are having a collection event near our home.
Judging by the prevalence of old computers at garage sales and my city's program, I'd say not as many as you might think.
The company I work for has a powerpoint presentation online. There is are no animations, no special transitions, just slides with pretty pictures and some words.
The PHB thinks -any- browser reads HTML and they have a "save as" dialog box for exactly this. So, what's the problem?
Non-IE browsers get a pop-up window telling them
"This presentation contains content that your browser may not be able to show properly. This presentation was optimized for more recent versions of Microsoft Internet Explorer."
If their open formats are not implemented like my example then MS Management has accepted there's a huge OSS weakness that they have yet to exploit. Maybe they make the open file format license revokable. Besides the obvious IP issues, what could it be?
Funny you should say that. Cell phones have the capacity to carry electronic cash. The sim card has more than enough security-related stuff to do it.
It would work something like this:
-Dial a number, machine voice asks you to enter the amount you want loaded onto the phone.
-Punch 20 for $20.00 machine voice confirms $20 and asks for PIN. $20 is now "on" your cell phone.
-A payments back-end handles the messy transaction clearing with the bank.
Merchant Transaction:
-Each merchant has their own phone number to call to make a transaction. Clerk enters your phone number hits "ok".
-Server waits for you to dial in. Can authenticate your phone well because of the SIM capabilities.
-Checks balance, verifies payment amount and asks for PIN.
-Deducts what the merchant's POS requests.
Basically takes the same payments backend as itunes. No Visa/Mastercard necessary, but you still have to get on the bank's transaction clearing.
There's POS -software- integration, but you would start with the big, centralized POS retailers who can pull this off. No POS hardware changes anyway.
I can't believe I'm the first one to think of this though. The idiots at Cingular, T-Mobile are too big and slow to see how close they are to a fscking gold-mine. I wonder if anyone can tell me if it's possible to do it without some cooperation from them. (needs crypto)
Well, you are doing it right then. That's a very good lesson about the current economic reality of some OSS software.
BTW, I have to laugh when a company won't pay for a simple support call. As you probably know the engineer wastes 3x-4x times the money in time searching for a solution.
Good luck to you.
Wow. There are just soo many different ways this post is wrong wrong wrong.
1. Europe is Economically Unhealthy
I'd argue that they are doing just the opposite. Streamlining markets, simplfying trade, lowering tariffs. If they can keep the IP free, then they will really be into somethings. You've heard of the EU right? It may not be happening quickly, but there's no doubt it's changing.
2. Europe is "losing" to the US
No. I'd argue that currently both the EU and US are both constantly struggling to maintain GDP growth and maintain high(er)employment. This is not "losing." See #1 for why the EU's growth opportunities are very good. That you think the U.S. is somehow winning shows how much of the USA-is-#1 crack you smoke. It's 2005, not 1950.
3. Subsidies EU-Yes US-no.
This is plain wrong. The American economy is subsidized in -many- ways. They simply aren't as obvious to you.
Please turn off the Fox News and learn a few *-facts-* regarding how the American economy operates.
Opportunity is knocking. Answer the door!
1. If you have other companies distributing your IP in a non-compliant manner, this would be a great time to "Lawyer-Up" and penalize the offenders. This truely is the American way.
2. If I was talented enough to write something Apache wanted I'd modify the project somewhat and sell the modified version to Apache. I can see some very nice annual license and support dollars. If they don't buy, then they don't want it enough. End of story.
3. Don't want to give support away? How about charging for support? $35 per support issue. Maybe an annual subscription price for those with deep pockets.
It sounds to me like you have made something great, but don't want to deal with the new issues that come out of being successful. That's okay, but don't complain.
I love a chance to work on a project where the world is beating a path to your door. Contact me if you need help.
When I used to look at this kind of information, the explanation went something like this:
-The information used to make up these market share numbers are generally reported by retailers/resellers. In this case, maybe they get some data from system integrators or from companies like IBM who deploy these things.
-Those numbers are aggregated and then estimates are added for channels they don't have good numbers for.
1. Compliments on Sarge.
I use Sarge for a desktop over the last 6 months and am quite satisified. Yeah, it's not -perfect-, but no show-stopper problems and whatever issues I find get fixed quickly. Big thanks to Debian volunteers. When it hits stable it will be even better!
2. Dumb Server Question
For desktops, there seem to be a couple of debian-based projects like Ubuntu. Are there similar server-specific projects or even a sub-project that sticks close to Debian? I'm aware of Adamantix, (which I couldn't get to install) but not others.
There are weaknesses with these value statements that are easy to exploit by MS.
-Stability and Usability are pretty much there for the average XP/2000 desktop user on MS. They don't know any better and tend to be satisfied. In the server world, it's a different game. The places I have worked tend to be small and they rely exclusively on M$ products in the back room. It's like the devil they know. (because they advertise/use M$ on the desktop...)
-The apps to open these proprietary files comes on most new PC's. The perception is that everyone has the applications to open these files.
-Most of us desire wealth and power. Imperialism is wealth and power on steroids. In a funny way, Americans like to be ruled too. So DRM lock-in makes users feel safer. So, arguing against either is not the smartest way to go.
Linux is great. It's a huge threat to M$'s wealth and M$ knows it. It's missing a killer something though. Something that redefines the marketplace. I'd love to hear some ideas because I want to put it into words. Feel free to email me to discuss further.
This the kind of BS that they will use to claim "PronHorn is more secure!!!" The reality of this would go something like:
1. Set up weak boxes
2. Send them to questionable sites.
3. Watch them get infected.
4. Figure out how they got infected.
5. Report how they got infected.
Then
A. Do nothing, there's "no budget" to fix the problems. (very likely)
B. Modify the code -just- enough to get rid of the worst offenders. (least likely)
C. Charge the end-user a subscription to "protect" them from threats found in their research with another enterprise software package. (my choice as most likely)
In the end Microsoft says, "We've committed billions to increased security in pronhorn. It's more usable and real secure and "just works." Apply more anti-competitive practices liberally and maintain monopoly.
What bugs me the most is it will sound like it's true and kill Linux adoption. But the security patches will just keep coming.
It wasn't so long ago the Sheriff released a bunch of convicts because they couldn't afford to keep them in jail. http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20050419- 0444-ca-labudget.html
/. the server connected to the network of readers?
It wasn't so long ago (months?) that inmates were dying at a rather alarming rate in L.A. Sheriff's jails too. I wish I had a link, but it was very news-worthy on LA public radio. (KPCC covers L.A. news great) The phrase "Sheriff's excessive use of force" never quite stuck.
I wonder what the resource requirements are for a system that "tracks convicts wherever they go in real-time" claim. Presumably thousands of reader devices always on and connected to some server. Is there a database backend? Or, does it just store locations temporarily. Could you
I'm disappointed to even hear of a device like this coming from Sony.
I could source a standalone box from Taiwan and put redhat on it too.
It's a clever application of commodity parts, which I expect from smaller companies with less history of innnovation.
Where did I leave that old walkman????
Yeah, he's starting a flamefest, but take a moment to look at it from his perspective:
-Dvorak needs to generate traffic and the old-style of technology reporting is not doing it. He can't just write about new technology any more because fewer people are reading that.
-Dvorak gets his ideas for stories from PR people. The PR hacks are still trying to give him "new technology" stories that don't generate traffic. This is the high-paid variety of PR reps, so we're talking MS, Adobemedia, Intuit. And what's really new from them anyway?
-Dvorak doesn't want to know about Linux because MS has indirectly paid his bills for so long he can't tell which way the wind is blowing.
-Linux is not ready for guys like Dvorak and WSJ Mossberg (sp?) IMHO they tend to be the last one's give a technology a positive review after so many others of their peers have already done so. Linux also needs a high-paid PR company and deep-pockets advertising budget to convert guys like Dvorak. By then, Microsoft will probably have it's own Linux distro.
This is really good news though. It means that the "Linux story" is going way up the media chain. It's really different and powerful. Otherwise, it wouldn't have warranted a single comment from Dvorak.
I have a controversial response to the part-line 'ain't gonna happen" comments.
1. Both Microsoft and Red Hat are under a great deal of pressure to deliver profits.
2. Currently, innovation is not coming at the pace that it did in the 90's. In any publicly traded industry, this leads to consolidation. (AdobeMedia anyone?)
3. Price of both companies shares has stagnated. This generally fuels consolidation because shareholders demand high profits.
4. Red Hat is not as cash-rich as MS, but they are the -clear- leader in enterprise linux.
The acquisition would be good for Microsoft.
-They buy the undisputed leader in the segment
-Make Red Hat the red-headed step-child in terms of price and service to Winblows server. This crushes the Sun and Novell Linux strategy and puts them in-play versus IBM.
-Fire most of Red Hat's engineers to keep the business profitable at rock-bottom prices, maintain the distro and stifle competitive innovation.
Now, the humans running MS would likely be mortally opposed to it as many have pointed out. And from a common-sense perspective it should qualify as anti-competitive, but the legal world doesn't run on common sense.
From a Microsoft business perspective, it is a -great- idea.
As enticing as it may sound to the movie studios, they would have a whole bunch of trust and cost issues:
1. A contactless crypto microprocessor smart card would set an OEM back likely $25/card for small quantities. If they want security printing, add another $20.
2. Who are you going to trust to issue the cards?
3. What happens when the DRM is cracked? Do I hand in my card for another? Talk about a logistics and cost-sink nightmare....
4. DVD player manufacturers won't like it either. The basic idea being, you want me to add a DRM engine to my already tiny-margin product?????
5. Unless the DVD standards companies get behind it, it's a good intellectual exercise.
The way they were made safer was through regulation, not self-motivated sense of "let's do this to gain some kind of competitive edge.", or "to protect consumers.." kind of arguements.
Then, when they were regulated into providing safer cars, the price of cars went up to pay for safety R&D. How much they went up doesn't matter.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I hardly think the current American political environment would support regulating MS.
Microsoft costs you every month:
The average american (including PHB's) won't care. Microsoft will be the equivalent of a cable tv monopoly. There's a base package (the OS), extra for HDTV (antivirus), extra for Pron channels (Pron) that consumers gladly pay each month now.
The worst thing that can come out of it for Microsoft is the equivalent of what some consumers do now. Which is buy the Tivo separately at Worst Buy. Who cares?
Yeah, but you and a whole lot of other people watched it right?
/. alone I'd say that Microsoft couldn't be happier.
/.'s could have guessed it was going to be all filler anyway.
That's all Microsoft wanted, and they got it. Judging by the number of comments that mention details from the event on
Based on what I've read, this thing was the worst kept secret in gaming. Why waste time watching?
Slightly OT:
I wonder who got paid the most out of the event. Did M$ get a cut of the commercials? Did MTV charge MS to do it?
Stories like this only hurt M$ alternatives. Here's how I see it:
1. Media constantly searches for new stories to entice readers to look at ads.
2. To entice readers to look at ads, writers build tension. In this case, the hero (big advertising $$ Microsoft) is being "challeneged" by other market participants. It doesn't matter how they define the issues, there's a challenge. This builds tension and a sense of excitement.
3. Microsoft finally releases something new(ish) and the writer proclaims, "Microsoft destroys its enemies! Our hero lives another day!!!" To the great pleasure of readers, Microsoft and the media outlet who just got you to look at more ads.
I think M$ competitors are willing participants because they get "some" press, but they are playing a losing game unless they can come up with more advertising dollars than Microsoft.
I'd like to know if anyone has a strategy to break this cycle. Other than IBM's mega-bucks linux ad campaigns, I don't know where to begin.
I can't believe this was modded insightful!
It's obvious the dumb moderators equate the free java download with -free- software.
It's also obvious they don't have any experience marketing a commercial product that uses java. The Java Tax is mighty high.
This is ample proof that non-free software has nothing to worry about from OSS.
Please tell me why not being able to substantiate non-fact-related parts of a story is a big deal? Moreover, if it is such a small number of stories, then why is it -so- bad?
I hardly believe she is the first to do this.
So what's going on with the parties in the story that is not being addressed?
1. Yes I do own a Thinkpad and its grrreat!
2. Paranoid and xenophobic? No.
If Lenovo is -so- great, wouldn't there be more China-based companies as viable tier-1 American competitors since most laptops come from China anyway? Well, where are they?
Chinese manufacturers have a different business culture that does not exactly mirror expensive American ideals like Quality and Service. Fox News would report that difference as "Chinese Products Suck! Stay Tuned!!!" Watching Fox is probably how you learned it's acceptable to be an adult and think like a child.
How about turning off Fox News and consider that there are cultural differences that make it very difficult to sell products into another culture that has a different sense of product value.