On can wonder how long it will be until Steve will announce that the next Pixar movie won't be released by Disney. Eisner has way more to lose by this stupid move than he has to gain. Most Pixar movies gross over $100 million at the box office. Apple users will have to pirate a hell of a lot of stuff to match the loss to Disney if the next Pixar movie goes to another studio.
If this continues I guess I'll have to boycott Disney someday. Funny, the last purchase I made from Disney was the Tron DVD and if I remember right it was all about giving the users more power. I guess Eisner hasn't seen it.
From my seat it doesn't matter. My company buys software to run our business. The cheaper and more hassle free (licencing issues), the better.
One possible future would involve companies using and releasing software with the GPL that they use to do their business. Things central to the business couldn't be released that way (i.e. manufacutring systems) but other things could (office applications, accounting apps.). The software "middleman" would effectively be avoided for these businesses and they would have software more specifically directed to and addressing their needs.
Service organizations and consultants could sell into this market and not have the overhead cost of the software for their solutions, allowing them to have larger margins, and lower operating budgets.
Businesses don't need commercial software to run their business, it just happens to be the only thing available in some cases, but that is changing.
It took this long to get someone to realize that while Microsoft can charge whatever it wants for Windows, if the price isn't high enough, they can't pay their bills.
It swings both ways because thats the only price point left.
Basically Microsoft defeated all competitors in the market, and elimintated the ability to charge for certain software.
Now the market itself has created a competitor that operates against the same strategy of providing software for free, the GPL.
That is exactly why Microsoft is so scared of Open Source software, it takes away the competitive advantage they had used to gain domination of the market.
But then, they reap what they sow, its their own damn fault that the price point for browsers, media players, etc. it $ 0.
192.168.1.100 is a private network address that won't route across the internet (unless you use multicasting, but then that's still not routed as a address, just works that way).
If you want a small private network you need these addresses as the only machine you can talk to at 127.0.0.1 is the one you're on.
If going after smal scale violators isn't worth it , why not make it not worth it to be a small scale copyright violator. If CD cost less than the cost of your time finding and downloading a song, why would you bother downloading it (especially if the CD contained only the song you wanted).
You would think they could come up with a business model to support this.
Hell, they sell bottled water for a $1, and most people can get water at their home for damn near free. You can't tell me they can't find a way to sell digital music without finding out a way to mitigate and minimize copyright violations.
Yeah I love their talk about utilization. Oh no i f you buy one of these IBM boxes you have to plan out what your peak utilization is!!!
And if you buy some sun machines to do the same thing you have to.... ummmm... plan out what your peak utilization is!!
The add that the server can't dynamically create more utilization capacity (extra hardware) dynamically. If anyone out there were selling a box that could do that, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. First we'd need some good nanobots, or maybe a replicator.....
You mean vote for the Democrats that are currently thinking of limiting free speech rights in advance of elections? And I don't care what you say about the rich and powerful having more rights to buy campaign ads. Tell that to the regular people paying some of their hard earned money to fund the NRA, the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, hell Greenpeace even. Those peoples voices will be diminished.
Perhaps you would like to rephrase that to ask people to vote Libertarian.
I really hate being given the choice of being ripped off when buying movies and music and not being able to support groups who will help out candidates I like (or have other people able to support groups I don't like).
But when push comes to shove I don't need to buy the music and movies, I really like having my First (and also Second) Amendment rights.
I took that to infer that those comments were long , legalease type arguments. I am kind of dissappointed by this. I mean I sent in a three paragraph, breif, but to the point letter, didn't say Microsoft sucks, didn't use dollar signs in Microsoft's name. But I would be sure my letter is not in those 50, probably because it wasn't worded like a legal document.
Yeah, that would be too bad. But then in a few years our problems will be the operating system automatically using our credit card information to charge us our yearly "Windows usage fee." That might keep people using Linux.
Face it Microsoft is only baby steps (and one pathetic settlement with the DOJ) away from making this a reality.
That trailer is an absolutely awesome trailer by the way. Comparing EP I and II trailers shows how much more potential this film II has over the first one.
Are you meaning to say that its perfectly acceptable for a company with 90% OS market share to choose to give away an application because someone else might be gaining a foothold.
In other industries this is called DUMPING and is considered illegal. But we're talking about the SOFTWARE industry, which we know was wayy to technical to have any oversight when Microsoft really made its move. I judged them guilty on anti-trust the second they released IE for free.
I just think it serves Microsoft right to now be competing against an operating system that is given away free and that cannot be squelched by buying out the company. It also proves that they are absolutely undoubtedly a monopoly, and a vindictive, viscious one at that.
If they dump HP/UX in favor of Linux, they had better port their LVM and disk mirroring software to Linux first (which would be a really good thing anyway)!
Nope, when she has destroyed HP enough look for her to show up in some cushy VP job at Microsoft.
This seems to be a viable option for many "leaders" in the IT industry. One wonders sometimes if the fix is in way before people like Fiorina start destroying the companies they supposedly run.
Bull, HP and Compaq have identical product lines.
There is absolutely no way the combined company will have sales equal to both companies operating independently.
The long term effects on the Ozone would be generation of more Ozone.
I know that high energy output will create Ozone out of regular O2.
It seems you are worried about the Ozone layer, it in actuallity would be fine, but Ozone would be generated all along the lasers path and waft along with the wind. With Ozone being posionous and all you probably wouldn't want to downwind from the beam.
Slashdot Mirror
On can wonder how long it will be until Steve will announce that the next Pixar movie won't be released by Disney. Eisner has way more to lose by this stupid move than he has to gain. Most Pixar movies gross over $100 million at the box office. Apple users will have to pirate a hell of a lot of stuff to match the loss to Disney if the next Pixar movie goes to another studio.
If this continues I guess I'll have to boycott Disney someday. Funny, the last purchase I made from Disney was the Tron DVD and if I remember right it was all about giving the users more power. I guess Eisner hasn't seen it.
From my seat it doesn't matter. My company buys software to run our business. The cheaper and more hassle free (licencing issues), the better.
One possible future would involve companies using and releasing software with the GPL that they use to do their business. Things central to the business couldn't be released that way (i.e. manufacutring systems) but other things could (office applications, accounting apps.). The software "middleman" would effectively be avoided for these businesses and they would have software more specifically directed to and addressing their needs.
Service organizations and consultants could sell into this market and not have the overhead cost of the software for their solutions, allowing them to have larger margins, and lower operating budgets.
Businesses don't need commercial software to run their business, it just happens to be the only thing available in some cases, but that is changing.
Please mod this up.
It took this long to get someone to realize that while Microsoft can charge whatever it wants for Windows, if the price isn't high enough, they can't pay their bills.
It swings both ways because thats the only price point left.
Basically Microsoft defeated all competitors in the market, and elimintated the ability to charge for certain software.
Now the market itself has created a competitor that operates against the same strategy of providing software for free, the GPL.
That is exactly why Microsoft is so scared of Open Source software, it takes away the competitive advantage they had used to gain domination of the market.
But then, they reap what they sow, its their own damn fault that the price point for browsers, media players, etc. it $ 0.
127.0.0.1 is a loopback address.
192.168.1.100 is a private network address that won't route across the internet (unless you use multicasting, but then that's still not routed as a address, just works that way).
If you want a small private network you need these addresses as the only machine you can talk to at 127.0.0.1 is the one you're on.
If going after smal scale violators isn't worth it , why not make it not worth it to be a small scale copyright violator. If CD cost less than the cost of your time finding and downloading a song, why would you bother downloading it (especially if the CD contained only the song you wanted).
You would think they could come up with a business model to support this.
Hell, they sell bottled water for a $1, and most people can get water at their home for damn near free. You can't tell me they can't find a way to sell digital music without finding out a way to mitigate and minimize copyright violations.
Yeah I love their talk about utilization. Oh no i f you buy one of these IBM boxes you have to plan out what your peak utilization is!!!
.... ummmm ... plan out what your peak utilization is!!
And if you buy some sun machines to do the same thing you have to
The add that the server can't dynamically create more utilization capacity (extra hardware) dynamically. If anyone out there were selling a box that could do that, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. First we'd need some good nanobots, or maybe a replicator.....
Yeah, but it'll be a while. They'll have to convert all the PERL stuff over to active server pages using IIS. ;-)
You mean vote for the Democrats that are currently thinking of limiting free speech rights in advance of elections? And I don't care what you say about the rich and powerful having more rights to buy campaign ads. Tell that to the regular people paying some of their hard earned money to fund the NRA, the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, hell Greenpeace even. Those peoples voices will be diminished.
Perhaps you would like to rephrase that to ask people to vote Libertarian.
I really hate being given the choice of being ripped off when buying movies and music and not being able to support groups who will help out candidates I like (or have other people able to support groups I don't like).
But when push comes to shove I don't need to buy the music and movies, I really like having my First (and also Second) Amendment rights.
I took that to infer that those comments were long , legalease type arguments. I am kind of dissappointed by this. I mean I sent in a three paragraph, breif, but to the point letter, didn't say Microsoft sucks, didn't use dollar signs in Microsoft's name. But I would be sure my letter is not in those 50, probably because it wasn't worded like a legal document.
Only because that's the only way Microsoft knows.
Microsoft has shown over time that there is absolutely no reason to trust them EVER, with ANYTHING.
Yeah, that would be too bad. But then in a few years our problems will be the operating system automatically using our credit card information to charge us our yearly "Windows usage fee." That might keep people using Linux.
Face it Microsoft is only baby steps (and one pathetic settlement with the DOJ) away from making this a reality.
Yep, he comes in following Anakin and Obi-wan.
That trailer is an absolutely awesome trailer by the way. Comparing EP I and II trailers shows how much more potential this film II has over the first one.
Are you meaning to say that its perfectly acceptable for a company with 90% OS market share to choose to give away an application because someone else might be gaining a foothold.
In other industries this is called DUMPING and is considered illegal. But we're talking about the SOFTWARE industry, which we know was wayy to technical to have any oversight when Microsoft really made its move. I judged them guilty on anti-trust the second they released IE for free.
I just think it serves Microsoft right to now be competing against an operating system that is given away free and that cannot be squelched by buying out the company. It also proves that they are absolutely undoubtedly a monopoly, and a vindictive, viscious one at that.
If they dump HP/UX in favor of Linux, they had better port their LVM and disk mirroring software to Linux first (which would be a really good thing anyway)!
Nope, when she has destroyed HP enough look for her to show up in some cushy VP job at Microsoft.
This seems to be a viable option for many "leaders" in the IT industry. One wonders sometimes if the fix is in way before people like Fiorina start destroying the companies they supposedly run.
Once again, she got rid of those too. All parts of Agilent.
She should just skip the killing off piece by piece and shut the whole business down.
The HP Board has got to get rid of her now.
Bull, HP and Compaq have identical product lines.
There is absolutely no way the combined company will have sales equal to both companies operating independently.
I'm pretty sure most of those systems were all part of the Agilent spinoff (another of HP many stupid moves of late.)
Acutally Joe Windows will care, because he doesn't want to play the CD, he wants to rip the CD to his hard drive, and won't be able to do that.
This is going to go over in the market like a lead brick.
Oh and be sure to add the $700 DVD burner to the Dell if you want a fair comparison to the iMac with the superdrive.
That always seems to be left out.
No, Linus is Tron. Only he doesn't care whether he is or not.
The long term effects on the Ozone would be generation of more Ozone.
I know that high energy output will create Ozone out of regular O2.
It seems you are worried about the Ozone layer, it in actuallity would be fine, but Ozone would be generated all along the lasers path and waft along with the wind. With Ozone being posionous and all you probably wouldn't want to downwind from the beam.
No i was actually hoping for iOsXrunningonX86. But was pretty sure that wasn't going to happen.
Now, that would be one hell of a "Junkyard Wars" episode!!