How does Microsoft limiting the number of chip manufacturers that will be officially supported on their next version of Tablet OS violate antitrust? All I see is Microsoft limiting their next Tablet OS to a select combination of chip manufacturer + OEM. There is no law that requires an OS to support all available hardware.
It would be antitrust if the deal also forbid the chip manufacturer or OEM from making products for another OS like Android. I didn't see any such language in the article.
Isn't this better than just having Microsoft as the sole manufacturer of the tablet that carries their next Tablet OS?
The 90's called and wants its Microsoft is a monopoly meme back.
lol also known as "Nokia's suicide plan." Seriously, at this point WP7 has as much future as the Zune. Did you ever see a ZuneHD? It was nicer and less locked-down than WP7.
All manufacturers have their share of flops (eg. Motorolla Rokr, Android 3.0 tablets, etc). Past performance is not an indicator of future value.
You might even say that WP7 is so bad, they need to pay phone manufacturers to use it.
Or more to the point, I said that they are following the path of Apple and purchased a handset manufacture to be their flagship phone hardware. Unlike Apple, Microsoft may continue to offer its Mobile OS license to other hardware manufacturers. Also I don't use Microsoft products, but I did a google search of WP7 reviews and the ones I've found (eg, Anantech, Engadget, Gizmodo, etc.) were overwhelmingly positive.
I'm being lazy, so I'll just quote wikipedia:
"However, Gene Sperling, Bill Clinton’s former economic advisor, has opined that, in the absence of appropriate policies 'the rising tide will lift some boats, but others will run aground'."
Nokia is going bust in a hurry. Look up its just released earnings report. Nothing short of a complete miracle can save Nokia now. Looking at current WP7 sales figures one would expect Jesus showing up somewhere for that to happen.
Sounds like Nokia was ripe for a take over and Microsoft took advantage of Nokia's situation. WP7 sales figures isn't something to write home about, but it is a reversal of fortune for Microsoft. They needed to stop the decline in market share and appear to be a credible competitor in the smart phone arena. The proposed refinements in WP8 and the purchase of Nokia to build the handset hardware allows Microsoft to catchup to Apple.
Microsoft is alienating the cell phone manufacturers by suing them all over and forcing them to take on very punishing patent extortion racket license. Strategic alliance do not mean the same to you as to me. At the same Microsoft is gearing up to battle it out with mobile operators by going all skype, making WP7 a platform that takes away mobile carriers income, not encourage it.
Cell phone manufacturers don't have feelings. They only understand profit. They went with Android thinking they didn't have to share any profit with the OS manufacturer. Microsoft just reminded them that just because the OS is free that doesn't mean you don't need to purchase the licenses to sell them. I deplore software patents, but corporations just love them. Microsoft is just being smart with their IP portfolio and the share holders demand this. As for Skype, it compliments the wireless carriers service. Wireless carriers sell the convenience of being able to carry your phone with you when you are away from the house. Skype allows you to make long distance and international calls to other Skype users for free and to non-Skype users for pennies a minute. You still need a connection with Skype.
Unless things change profoundly in Microsoft land they are toast except for two areas, Office and WIndows. Everything else is just sinkholes where money is tossed instead of paid out in dividends to the shareholders. Since the stock has tanked, i dont think that can keep up forever.
Sure if you ignore the game console market and that Skype thing.
Perhaps if I were a total idiot I would say that. There is a world of difference between applying selective pressure to existing strains to slowly evolve them over many generations, and cutting out individual slices of genetic code to create something you would never get by natural processes. If you really can't see the difference you are either (1) stupid, (2) willfully ignorant, or (3) an industry shill.
I do know the difference between cross pollination and gene splicing. I don't endorse the use of gene splicing. I was merely pointing out that coincidently the crop mentioned in the article is man made. The domesticated potato is not entirely a product of nature.
The reason I pointed it out, in the first place, was because the parent to my post stated:
I'm not 100% against GM foods of any sort but there is a real concern that any cross-breeding(which maybe some consider "forcing" it on them, I'm not sure about that though) will result in an entirely unsafe food supply...
I'm not an idiot, but at least I'm not an over reactionary cunt who doesn't even have the balls to post under a pseudonym (this is directed at the AC).
Its overly simplistic to put the blame on Ballmer since it was Bill Gates that got Microsoft under close scrutiny from monopoly enforcement agencies all over the world. Bill Gates was also the one that won Microsoft the biggest EU fine in history for Bills predatory practices.
Translation: Ballmer isn't as good as Gates. Under Bill Gate's leadership, Microsoft garnered so much market share that it scared nations.
What Ballmer has done is followed in Bill Gates footstep with so-so products sold by extremely hard marketing and very shoddy business practices. If anything Ballmer is just a bleaker version of Bill. The return of Bill Gates would just be about more pressure on OEMs, more underhanded deals and more of using the monopoly again.
Wrong. Ballmer is relying on momentum to keep Microsoft afloat. This is what the share holders are upset about. They see a future where most of the money are in mobile computing appliances and it appears to the man on the street that Microsoft's extensive portfolio is stuck on the desktop. This isn't necessarily true but their server products and mobile OSs haven't been stellar performers.
Personally i would love it if Bill Gates took the helm as it would make Microsoft become irrelevant even faster than today.
Personally I think its a shame someone can't enjoy their retirement without a bunch of whiny shareholders begging him to come back to work. Shareholder's are holding on the illusion that if Bill Gates returns then somehow he would be able to bring Microsoft back into a strategic marketing position that would preserve their market share.
The mobile and computing industry at large is right now liquid mercury and the tighter Microsoft squeezes the sooner it will slip.
Sounds like a pipe dream. Microsoft is building strategic alliances with cell phone manufacturers (eg. Nokia) and renewing their commitment to the smart phone market that they neglected since they dropped the ball on Windows CE back when Gates was preaching "Windows Everywhere". I wouldn't count Microsoft out just yet.
Coincidently what we call a potato is a result of centuries of cross pollination. Technically you could say there were never really any non-GM potatoes, since cross-pollination is just an old technique for genetically modifying crops.
I thought you'd suggest a prepay plan like Boost, Virgin Mobile, TracFone, Net10, or others.
You can get a prepaid GSM phone from a third party carrier. I would recommend sticking with GSM and making sure you get a quad band phone. This way you can get rural local carriers like Prairie Wireless on the 800Mhzish band in states like New Mexico, and have the added bonus of being able to use the phone at home.
The gpl and lgpl are there to protect the freedom of users.
Actually that is not totally correct. GPL and LGPL protects the copyright holder by forcing users, who make changes and redistribute the derivative work, to make the changes available to the original copyright holder and public at large. The side effect is that the forced disclosure of source code required by the GPL and LGPL benefits more people since it allows for forks and continuation of development even if the copyright holder no longer supports said code.
It's a subtle but potent distinction. The original copyright holder wanted his/her code to be available to the public and have it to include all improvements made by others. The GPL forces the user to respect the copyright holder's wishes. The problem with websites using modified GPLv2 code is that it doesn't fully protect the copyright holder's intent. The public at large still use the modified code since the difference between running on a remote server and running it on your local machine is inconsequential since you still have access to the results of the code. Because the executable code is not being distributed, the copyright holder and public at large don't have access to the modifications being used by the website. GPLv3 fixes this oversight and strengthens the copyright holder's intent of keeping the source code available.
I don't mind Roblimo's postings. I just wish he did it a little differently.
Roblimo, please post your thoughts as journal entries and then submit a link to said journal entry with a short summary of your topic. This way we can decide if we want to read your article.
Of course no harm - no foul, the front page does make a short synopsis. However it does make me question if Roblimo wrote the article responding to Bennett Haselton's post, or posting the article for Bennet. Linking to Robimo's or Bennett's journal entry would make this clear.
It took me longer to pass security then it did to check in. All airlines should be like this.
That's fast considering that airport security in Australia is faster than the US. They still do all the checks (I've been swabbed for chemicals twice), but they don't slow down the line by requiring people to take of their shoes.
I flew Qantas to and from Alice Springs. While I never had any issues and the service was excellent during the transpacific flight, I have witnessed some major screw up on other flights. My colleague left Alice a day earlier then I and when he arrived at the airport there were a huge number of people standing around in the airport lobby. He thought there was going to be a full flight to Sydney. Instead it turned out that the plane had left Sydney without any luggage. Nobody had luggage, and the next plane from Sydney wasn't until the next day around noon. This was during the Easter weekend, and I learned how seriously Australians take their easter weekend.:P
The air system in Australia is screwed up anyway. We've shipped some of our equipment via Air Express (by unnamed brown guys *hint*). The packages were shipped during the last week in April, and the packages still sit in Darwin as I type this comment. The funny thing is the large pieces of equipment that we shipped via ocean container will beat the air shipment home.
To be fair NASA gives money to SpaceX and other space related industries as parts of its COTS initiative. The reason for the reemergence of the capsule is to eliminate the safety issues associated with the space shuttle. Having the crew above the rockets rather than along side them will lower the possibility of debris endangering the crew during launch.
Not to mention, NASA doesn't have the money to do anything too revolutionary. Their first priority is to reestablish the US's direct access to space.
Actually I looked at my contract and it says 2 gigabytes. You can blame marketing for enticing you into the store. However you should blame yourself for signing a contract before reading it.
Without network overhead (packet headers, hand offs, collisions, etc) you'd be looking at approximately 2386 secs which is 39 mins and 46 secs.
This is much larger than the 4 min 45 seconds you quoted. This assumes of course that you have no collisions or transmit / receive errors AND you are receiving data constantly.
Now lets talk about Netflix via iPad3G (I couldn't find any other reference at the moment). I googled someone's observation and they watched a video stream for 31:36 (1896 secs) and it consumed 143.2 MB of the plan (150156032 bytes). This works out to be 79196 bytes/sec. At this rate it would take 27116 secs or 7 Hours 31 Minutes 56 Seconds.
All of the above assumes I haven't fat fingered a number on my calculator app this late in the afternoon.
You might not waste money on a smartphone, but please spend some on math tutoring.
Slashdot Mirror
How does Microsoft limiting the number of chip manufacturers that will be officially supported on their next version of Tablet OS violate antitrust? All I see is Microsoft limiting their next Tablet OS to a select combination of chip manufacturer + OEM. There is no law that requires an OS to support all available hardware.
It would be antitrust if the deal also forbid the chip manufacturer or OEM from making products for another OS like Android. I didn't see any such language in the article.
Isn't this better than just having Microsoft as the sole manufacturer of the tablet that carries their next Tablet OS?
The 90's called and wants its Microsoft is a monopoly meme back.
All manufacturers have their share of flops (eg. Motorolla Rokr, Android 3.0 tablets, etc). Past performance is not an indicator of future value.
Or more to the point, I said that they are following the path of Apple and purchased a handset manufacture to be their flagship phone hardware. Unlike Apple, Microsoft may continue to offer its Mobile OS license to other hardware manufacturers. Also I don't use Microsoft products, but I did a google search of WP7 reviews and the ones I've found (eg, Anantech, Engadget, Gizmodo, etc.) were overwhelmingly positive.
1. They are making a case for more funding to combat "cyberterrorism".
2. To a hammer everything looks like a nail. To the Pentagon everything look like war.
I'm being lazy, so I'll just quote wikipedia: "However, Gene Sperling, Bill Clinton’s former economic advisor, has opined that, in the absence of appropriate policies 'the rising tide will lift some boats, but others will run aground'."
Sounds like Nokia was ripe for a take over and Microsoft took advantage of Nokia's situation. WP7 sales figures isn't something to write home about, but it is a reversal of fortune for Microsoft. They needed to stop the decline in market share and appear to be a credible competitor in the smart phone arena. The proposed refinements in WP8 and the purchase of Nokia to build the handset hardware allows Microsoft to catchup to Apple.
Cell phone manufacturers don't have feelings. They only understand profit. They went with Android thinking they didn't have to share any profit with the OS manufacturer. Microsoft just reminded them that just because the OS is free that doesn't mean you don't need to purchase the licenses to sell them. I deplore software patents, but corporations just love them. Microsoft is just being smart with their IP portfolio and the share holders demand this. As for Skype, it compliments the wireless carriers service. Wireless carriers sell the convenience of being able to carry your phone with you when you are away from the house. Skype allows you to make long distance and international calls to other Skype users for free and to non-Skype users for pennies a minute. You still need a connection with Skype.
Sure if you ignore the game console market and that Skype thing.
I do know the difference between cross pollination and gene splicing. I don't endorse the use of gene splicing. I was merely pointing out that coincidently the crop mentioned in the article is man made. The domesticated potato is not entirely a product of nature.
The reason I pointed it out, in the first place, was because the parent to my post stated:
I'm not an idiot, but at least I'm not an over reactionary cunt who doesn't even have the balls to post under a pseudonym (this is directed at the AC).
Translation: Ballmer isn't as good as Gates. Under Bill Gate's leadership, Microsoft garnered so much market share that it scared nations.
Wrong. Ballmer is relying on momentum to keep Microsoft afloat. This is what the share holders are upset about. They see a future where most of the money are in mobile computing appliances and it appears to the man on the street that Microsoft's extensive portfolio is stuck on the desktop. This isn't necessarily true but their server products and mobile OSs haven't been stellar performers.
Personally I think its a shame someone can't enjoy their retirement without a bunch of whiny shareholders begging him to come back to work. Shareholder's are holding on the illusion that if Bill Gates returns then somehow he would be able to bring Microsoft back into a strategic marketing position that would preserve their market share.
Sounds like a pipe dream. Microsoft is building strategic alliances with cell phone manufacturers (eg. Nokia) and renewing their commitment to the smart phone market that they neglected since they dropped the ball on Windows CE back when Gates was preaching "Windows Everywhere". I wouldn't count Microsoft out just yet.
Coincidently what we call a potato is a result of centuries of cross pollination. Technically you could say there were never really any non-GM potatoes, since cross-pollination is just an old technique for genetically modifying crops.
I thought you'd suggest a prepay plan like Boost, Virgin Mobile, TracFone, Net10, or others.
You can get a prepaid GSM phone from a third party carrier. I would recommend sticking with GSM and making sure you get a quad band phone. This way you can get rural local carriers like Prairie Wireless on the 800Mhzish band in states like New Mexico, and have the added bonus of being able to use the phone at home.
If you read TFA you would see that they only use them while on the ground and above 10,000 feet. Coincidently about the same as the passengers.
Actually "students" are what separate the research professors from the hazardous substances. Didn't you read the safety guidelines? :P
while packing those crates to leave Australia.
Actually that is not totally correct. GPL and LGPL protects the copyright holder by forcing users, who make changes and redistribute the derivative work, to make the changes available to the original copyright holder and public at large. The side effect is that the forced disclosure of source code required by the GPL and LGPL benefits more people since it allows for forks and continuation of development even if the copyright holder no longer supports said code.
It's a subtle but potent distinction. The original copyright holder wanted his/her code to be available to the public and have it to include all improvements made by others. The GPL forces the user to respect the copyright holder's wishes. The problem with websites using modified GPLv2 code is that it doesn't fully protect the copyright holder's intent. The public at large still use the modified code since the difference between running on a remote server and running it on your local machine is inconsequential since you still have access to the results of the code. Because the executable code is not being distributed, the copyright holder and public at large don't have access to the modifications being used by the website. GPLv3 fixes this oversight and strengthens the copyright holder's intent of keeping the source code available.
What? The Pope is Catholic! Has anyone told the Pope this?
I don't mind Roblimo's postings. I just wish he did it a little differently.
Roblimo, please post your thoughts as journal entries and then submit a link to said journal entry with a short summary of your topic. This way we can decide if we want to read your article.
Of course no harm - no foul, the front page does make a short synopsis. However it does make me question if Roblimo wrote the article responding to Bennett Haselton's post, or posting the article for Bennet. Linking to Robimo's or Bennett's journal entry would make this clear.
God help us all.
That's fast considering that airport security in Australia is faster than the US. They still do all the checks (I've been swabbed for chemicals twice), but they don't slow down the line by requiring people to take of their shoes.
I flew Qantas to and from Alice Springs. While I never had any issues and the service was excellent during the transpacific flight, I have witnessed some major screw up on other flights. My colleague left Alice a day earlier then I and when he arrived at the airport there were a huge number of people standing around in the airport lobby. He thought there was going to be a full flight to Sydney. Instead it turned out that the plane had left Sydney without any luggage. Nobody had luggage, and the next plane from Sydney wasn't until the next day around noon. This was during the Easter weekend, and I learned how seriously Australians take their easter weekend. :P
The air system in Australia is screwed up anyway. We've shipped some of our equipment via Air Express (by unnamed brown guys *hint*). The packages were shipped during the last week in April, and the packages still sit in Darwin as I type this comment. The funny thing is the large pieces of equipment that we shipped via ocean container will beat the air shipment home.
I would laugh but I still remember receiving telexes on the ASR-33.
Out of curiosity, what did you pick for environmental control (ie. heat) ?
$sh [insert script name here]
No execute bit needs to be set.
Need proof?
$vi test
#!/bin/bash
echo "This is a test"
:x
./test ./test: Permission denied
bash:
Looks promising. Now lets tell bash to run that script without setting the execute bit.
$sh test
This is a test
Yep, it executed.
To be fair NASA gives money to SpaceX and other space related industries as parts of its COTS initiative. The reason for the reemergence of the capsule is to eliminate the safety issues associated with the space shuttle. Having the crew above the rockets rather than along side them will lower the possibility of debris endangering the crew during launch.
Not to mention, NASA doesn't have the money to do anything too revolutionary. Their first priority is to reestablish the US's direct access to space.
Actually I looked at my contract and it says 2 gigabytes. You can blame marketing for enticing you into the store. However you should blame yourself for signing a contract before reading it.
It's a sophisticated way of saying:
On one hand, you chastise people for being a consumer and give bullshit examples like...
:P
I think your math is off.
Your assumptions:
Cap 2GB = 2 147 483 648 Bytes
Theoretical Speeds = 7.2 mb / Sec = 900 000 Bytes / Sec
Without network overhead (packet headers, hand offs, collisions, etc) you'd be looking at approximately 2386 secs which is 39 mins and 46 secs.
This is much larger than the 4 min 45 seconds you quoted. This assumes of course that you have no collisions or transmit / receive errors AND you are receiving data constantly.
Now lets talk about Netflix via iPad3G (I couldn't find any other reference at the moment). I googled someone's observation and they watched a video stream for 31:36 (1896 secs) and it consumed 143.2 MB of the plan (150156032 bytes). This works out to be 79196 bytes/sec. At this rate it would take 27116 secs or 7 Hours 31 Minutes 56 Seconds.
All of the above assumes I haven't fat fingered a number on my calculator app this late in the afternoon.
You might not waste money on a smartphone, but please spend some on math tutoring.