I put my own machines together, I pay for nothing but what I want. I don't see a real problem for anyone else to do that.
If your complaint is that the vast majority of people want to buy something easily that works out of the box: that's called Windows OEM installation.
The reality is that people DO want whats easy and works. They don't want to mess around chasing down patches and drivers.
Just out of idle curiosity, since the primary competitor(s) to Microsoft these days are in the OSS world, how does selling your work for a given price
compete unfairly with selling your product for 'free'?
Had great special effects for 1956 and quite a bit later.
Good SciFi value with robots, and a pre-cursor at least to Asimov's Laws. And speculative merit in the question of what would happen if you did create each individual as an all powerful being.
Clearly a comment by someone who's done no assembly language software development. DeMarco gives the 'chump' factor for estimating any software with a major assembly language component: 'chump' = no estimated time to complete.
Secondarily, why should one spend forever and millions of dollars in software development costs when spending a couple of $hundred on memory will solve the problem. Even if it's a couple of $thousand it's a no-op for a real development effort.
It's really time some of you dweebs join the real world of costs and schedules when dealing with projects.
Software development is meant to develop a product not be an artform.
Why doesn't someone simply put in, at a minimum,
a digital signature on the caller ID packets.
Sooner or later one could extend this to an encryption system for the conversation itself. Which, to my mind, is necessary in any case.
Not that most of you weasels would believe it, but BillG was originally against software patents. But once they started being issued he said words to the effect of "We've got to have them or we'll be put out of business." One might add, "by litigation" from every podunk nitwit with $10k to spend playing lotto investor in the fleece Microsoft game.
So, if Microsoft patents every little thing it will do one of two things: 1) protect it from endless lawsuits by hapless dweebs; 2) get them to reform the !#@$#!@ Patent Office have them stop issuing idiotic patents which are "OBVIOUS TO THE SKILLED PRACTITIONER OF THE ART".
Slashdot Mirror
Check Lomborg's book... http://www.lomborg.com/books.htm And various commentaries.
I put my own machines together, I pay for nothing but what I want. I don't see a real problem for anyone else to do that. If your complaint is that the vast majority of people want to buy something easily that works out of the box: that's called Windows OEM installation. The reality is that people DO want whats easy and works. They don't want to mess around chasing down patches and drivers.
Just out of idle curiosity, since the primary competitor(s) to Microsoft these days are in the OSS world, how does selling your work for a given price compete unfairly with selling your product for 'free'?
Certainly better than Solaris at the very least.
Had great special effects for 1956 and quite a bit later.
Good SciFi value with robots, and a pre-cursor at least to Asimov's Laws. And speculative merit in the question of what would happen if you did create each individual as an all powerful being.
And Anne Francis.
Clearly a comment by someone who's done no assembly language software development. DeMarco gives the 'chump' factor for estimating any software with a major assembly language component: 'chump' = no estimated time to complete. Secondarily, why should one spend forever and millions of dollars in software development costs when spending a couple of $hundred on memory will solve the problem. Even if it's a couple of $thousand it's a no-op for a real development effort. It's really time some of you dweebs join the real world of costs and schedules when dealing with projects. Software development is meant to develop a product not be an artform.
Why doesn't someone simply put in, at a minimum, a digital signature on the caller ID packets. Sooner or later one could extend this to an encryption system for the conversation itself. Which, to my mind, is necessary in any case.
Not that most of you weasels would believe it, but BillG was originally against software patents. But once they started being issued he said words to the effect of "We've got to have them or we'll be put out of business." One might add, "by litigation" from every podunk nitwit with $10k to spend playing lotto investor in the fleece Microsoft game.
So, if Microsoft patents every little thing it will do one of two things:
1) protect it from endless lawsuits by hapless dweebs;
2) get them to reform the !#@$#!@ Patent Office have them stop issuing idiotic patents which are "OBVIOUS TO THE SKILLED PRACTITIONER OF THE ART".