And the number of people who buy it just for the software? Isn't part of OSX's appeal that it runs flawlessly? And isn't that because OSX is specifically tuned for its hardware? How well would it run on generic hardware?
Also, however customers value the software over the hardware, is it in Apple's interests to be a software company?
True, AmigaOS was a bad example. Nevertheless, IBM required Intel to share technology with AMD so that it (IBM) would have at least two chip providers. Could it not as easily have made similar demands on Microsoft? You mentioned DR-DOS, and I believe PC-DOS was also a possibility.
The cost might have been higher, but would the price have been higher? By that argument, any industry with large economies of scale "should" be a monopoly.
What if AmigaOS had been available on Intel? Would it have been any harder to maintain it?
Regarding the Supreme Court decision on rights for non-citizens, I thought that it granted non-citizens rights from the Constitution, but not privileges. Except for things like the 14th Amendment, which explicitly says that it applies to citizens.
Since when has the Supreme Court been bound by the Constitution?
If you modify the Pythagorean theorem, then it's no longer the same theorem. Also, while the encryption itself may be unbreakable, it doesn't mean that something else can't be broken.
To give a layman's translation... You take two photons and entagle them and then send them down two fiber optic line of the same length (say 4km) and then a device on each end determines which direction the spin is.
What tolerance is there for the diffence between the two lengths? What tolerance for the difference in material between the two cables (the photons have different speeds in different materials)?
Ummm, no. The price benefit came about due to three players: Microsoft, Pheonix, and Compaq. These three players together broke IBM's vertical control of the PC market, hence the price benefit. Hence the ubiquity.
And how did Microsoft break IBM's control of the market? IBM gave Microsoft control. Also, IBM commodotized all the hardware except for the BIOS, and without IBM's imprimatur, would the PC have appealed to businesses at all?
How many fewer users would have had computers in the absence of Microsoft? BSD developed the TCP/IP protocols. Tim Berners Lee produced http and html.
I have struggled with that question. THe fact is that more OS's would have ment more expensive computers. So there was a tradeoff. This is not so now that open source operating systems have matured enough that they can be effectively used at all levels of business.
How would having more OSes (as opposed to more architectures) have made computers more expensive? And even so, would having competition have made the added expense worthwhile?
Microsoft is the proto-Wal-mart of the software world (you know, the seller of cheap plastic junk). The approach has generally been that it doesn't have to be better, just cheaper and more appealing to the lowest common denominator. This price advantage of Microsoft has been probably on the whole beneficial to the industry in that it has made computing more ubiquitous and therefore has helped the development of the internet and even open source as a global phenominon. However, Microsoft software tends to be poorly thought out and poorly implemented.
Exactly what is the "price advantage" of Microsoft? IBM made PC hardware a commodity (and therefore ubiquitous). How did Microsoft help develop the net? Are you saying that no other software could have run on PCs? Is it beneficial to the industry that Microsoft is ubiquitous? Might not we have been better off with other OSes as well?
Then if someone replaces an executable, it should also have the same checksum. If changing the executable changes the checksum, then how does one recompile? If it doesn't change the checksum, then what protection is there?
The question is, how does one distinguish between authorized and unauthorized changing of executables? Would the anti-malware application simply reprompt the user for permission? If the user doesn't have permission to edit/delete/install the executable, then why should the user have permission to approve it?
Any executable? I write foo.c and compile to foo.o, and then execute foo.o. Then I edit foo.c and recompile foo.o. The recompiled foo.o should have a different checksum. Will I be able to execute it? Or do I have to rename my executables?
Just remember Stock only is money when you sell it. Before that it is just the current value of of it. Once you buy stock your money is gone. When you sell it again then you get what it is worth at the time back.
If Symantec could raise its prices to cover the costs, then why wouldn't it just raise its prices anyway? The penalty it pays to the IRS does not affect its marginal costs, so if it were better off raising its prices to pay off the fine (increase in revenue/profit), it would be better off raising them anyway.
Note that even a monopolist is constrained by the demand for its product.
Gee, I have all of my data on my hard drive, and I can fit my/home partition onto a CD. Why do I need to jack in anywhere? As someone else has mentioned, tax software is a good candidate for this, but what about Photoshop? Or a compiler? or games? CD-ROM-only drives may become obsolete, but will new optical media be backward compatible (can one use CDs in an HD-DVD/Blu-Ray drive?)?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't expect expect it for free, I pay for my distributions.
You'd have to have /mnt/windows mounted read/write, as opposed to read-only. Rather, find the partition (let's say /dev/hda2), and run
/mnt/windows /dev/hda2
#umount
#mkfs.reiserfs
If you want to be sure, you could also do
#dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda2
And the number of people who buy it just for the software? Isn't part of OSX's appeal that it runs flawlessly? And isn't that because OSX is specifically tuned for its hardware? How well would it run on generic hardware?
Also, however customers value the software over the hardware, is it in Apple's interests to be a software company?
Are you saying that no one has ever wiped OSX from a Mac and replaced it with Linux?
True, AmigaOS was a bad example. Nevertheless, IBM required Intel to share technology with AMD so that it (IBM) would have at least two chip providers. Could it not as easily have made similar demands on Microsoft? You mentioned DR-DOS, and I believe PC-DOS was also a possibility.
Are you saying that the GP is claiming that they are mutually exclusive? What is the default meaning of "or"? Exclusive or inclusive (but not both)?
The cost might have been higher, but would the price have been higher? By that argument, any industry with large economies of scale "should" be a monopoly.
What if AmigaOS had been available on Intel? Would it have been any harder to maintain it?
I did qualify my remark. I wouldn't expect Senator Clinton to be a paladin for liberty.
You forgot Michael "You're doing a heck of a job" Brown. Although that one might not be funny to the residents of New Orleans.
Depending on who succeeds him, perhaps break out the champagne and celebrate a (possible) return of liberty?
Regarding the Supreme Court decision on rights for non-citizens, I thought that it granted non-citizens rights from the Constitution, but not privileges. Except for things like the 14th Amendment, which explicitly says that it applies to citizens.
Since when has the Supreme Court been bound by the Constitution?
If you modify the Pythagorean theorem, then it's no longer the same theorem. Also, while the encryption itself may be unbreakable, it doesn't mean that something else can't be broken.
To give a layman's translation... You take two photons and entagle them and then send them down two fiber optic line of the same length (say 4km) and then a device on each end determines which direction the spin is.
What tolerance is there for the diffence between the two lengths? What tolerance for the difference in material between the two cables (the photons have different speeds in different materials)?
You might as well challenge the truth of the Pythagorean theorem.
It doesn't hold in non-Euclidean geometry.
Ummm, no. The price benefit came about due to three players: Microsoft, Pheonix, and Compaq. These three players together broke IBM's vertical control of the PC market, hence the price benefit. Hence the ubiquity.
And how did Microsoft break IBM's control of the market? IBM gave Microsoft control. Also, IBM commodotized all the hardware except for the BIOS, and without IBM's imprimatur, would the PC have appealed to businesses at all?
How many fewer users would have had computers in the absence of Microsoft? BSD developed the TCP/IP protocols. Tim Berners Lee produced http and html.
I have struggled with that question. THe fact is that more OS's would have ment more expensive computers. So there was a tradeoff. This is not so now that open source operating systems have matured enough that they can be effectively used at all levels of business.
How would having more OSes (as opposed to more architectures) have made computers more expensive? And even so, would having competition have made the added expense worthwhile?
Microsoft is the proto-Wal-mart of the software world (you know, the seller of cheap plastic junk). The approach has generally been that it doesn't have to be better, just cheaper and more appealing to the lowest common denominator. This price advantage of Microsoft has been probably on the whole beneficial to the industry in that it has made computing more ubiquitous and therefore has helped the development of the internet and even open source as a global phenominon. However, Microsoft software tends to be poorly thought out and poorly implemented.
Exactly what is the "price advantage" of Microsoft? IBM made PC hardware a commodity (and therefore ubiquitous). How did Microsoft help develop the net? Are you saying that no other software could have run on PCs? Is it beneficial to the industry that Microsoft is ubiquitous? Might not we have been better off with other OSes as well?
Then if someone replaces an executable, it should also have the same checksum. If changing the executable changes the checksum, then how does one recompile? If it doesn't change the checksum, then what protection is there?
The question is, how does one distinguish between authorized and unauthorized changing of executables? Would the anti-malware application simply reprompt the user for permission? If the user doesn't have permission to edit/delete/install the executable, then why should the user have permission to approve it?
Any executable? I write foo.c and compile to foo.o, and then execute foo.o. Then I edit foo.c and recompile foo.o. The recompiled foo.o should have a different checksum. Will I be able to execute it? Or do I have to rename my executables?
Just remember Stock only is money when you sell it. Before that it is just the current value of of it. Once you buy stock your money is gone. When you sell it again then you get what it is worth at the time back.
Ever hear of dividends?
If Symantec could raise its prices to cover the costs, then why wouldn't it just raise its prices anyway? The penalty it pays to the IRS does not affect its marginal costs, so if it were better off raising its prices to pay off the fine (increase in revenue/profit), it would be better off raising them anyway.
Note that even a monopolist is constrained by the demand for its product.
And what about those of us who make a living without Microsoft?
Don't be silly, the Townsville Local Newspaper would have the headline:
Powerpuff Girls Nab Crime Boss
Gee, I have all of my data on my hard drive, and I can fit my /home partition onto a CD. Why do I need to jack in anywhere? As someone else has mentioned, tax software is a good candidate for this, but what about Photoshop? Or a compiler? or games? CD-ROM-only drives may become obsolete, but will new optical media be backward compatible (can one use CDs in an HD-DVD/Blu-Ray drive?)?
The editors of Wikipedia might disagree:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship
What if normal users don't have local admin privileges?