No wonder they want this to be a class action suit. Unless they have some evidence that they were subject to click fraud then they have no case on their own.
They do have to sue Google. Google is their vendor. Their alternative to suing Google would be to file a suit against an unknown - or if they suspect a specific company they could name them, but I doubt that's the case - company and subpoena Google for their advertising business's records. It's much more likely to be a longer and more expensive case that way, though.
What they want is this: Google actively monitor's for click fraud. Google sues company X for click fraud. Company Y sues Google for similar damages to what Google got from Company X.
See, they don't really want an end to click fraud. They just want a share of the click fraud profits.
And what is wrong with that? IE is the most popular browser by a long way, sure Mozilla/Firefox is making progress but they are still a way off. Or are you saying that MS should support everyone else's browsers? That is kinda like Ford making engines that will bolt straight into a Toyota... not. gonna. happen.
It's more like Ford making cars that can only drive on special roads, roads that no other car company can make cars that drive on. Then Ford patents certain aspects of those roads. After that, Ford uses incentives to convince various others that they should make those roads the only way to drive to their property, eventually convincing highly desirable property owners to switch to these roads. Then, seeing that these roads are the only way to do business with some clients, corporations are forced to start buying Ford cars for their fleets. Soon, there becomes no viable economic reason to buy any other cars for their fleet but Fords.
I could go further, but this analogy thing is starting to annoy even me.
As I said, several support calls yeilded nothing. As soon as I got my connection back they would play it off as fixed or an issue not of their creation and bid me farewell. Their technical support staff is, as pretty much all call center technical support staff, useless.
One thing I did find out in the move: It may have something to do with the splitters other equipment on premises. When I first moved I had a decent connection, but it wasn't as rock solid as it is today. They had my cable turned on but not installed and I was using the previous occupant's setup plus some splitters and cables that I'd brought with me. When the tech finally showed up (took almost three months, but that's another story) he replaced all of the splitters. He proclaimed that even the ones that were only about a year old and had been shipped with the cable modem weren't up to their standards anymore and that iO required a higher quality connection. After he was gone I noticed less dropped packets and I haven't been disconnected since.
Port 80 matters to me because I'd like to use it for other things. On a lot of networks they block connections to other ports than 80, 21, and 443, some are even more overzealous and block 443 and/or 21. So if I want to be relatively sure that I can SSH into my home machine when I'm at random windows box X I have to run on port 443 and hope it's not blocked.
This was a real killer when I was at school and the admins there seemed to think that if you couldn't take your work on a 3.5" disk then you shouldn't take it home. I had to resort to using Yahoo webmail to send my homework to myself because they only allowed outbound connections to port 80. Between school and Optimum Online I was transported back 15 years to a time when the best way to transfer data was via floppy disk.
The more services block port 80 the more that viruses, worms, and the ilk will just run on a non-standard port. It's not like people who fall for phishing schemes would notice the:90 after the IP or domain.
Your packet loss issues sound familiar to me. When I was living in the next town over it seemed that there was either faulty equipment or the network in that area was oversold. Either way, the net effect was that I had a lot of packet loss issues and I was disconnected every couple of hours. Every time I was disconnected the only way the help-desk could get me reconnected was to have me hard-boot the modem (unplug it and plug it back in, no power switch). Several calls didn't fix this issue.
What did fix the issue was moving. When I came to my present residence I found a faster and more reliable network waiting. I've had zero problems, even though I'm using the exact same setup as before.
The point is, OO's network seems to be hit and miss depending on the neighborhood.
Bah. It's usable. I use it every day, and I do upload stuff. I've been capped once, but that was because I downloaded 3GB of OGG files from home to work, at a sustained 0.5mbit (limited more by my company's T-1 being used than my connection). I leave my server connected 24/7, and have very little downtime with my connection.
If you want to complain, you should complain about their port-blocking of 80 and 25. If you want to run a webserver it either must be on a non-standard port or HTTPS. I run mine on 90.
For the record, though, at least it's better than RoadRunner. They cap their upstream lower all the time, and if you have too much downstream traffic they'll switch you over to a business account or disconnect you. It happened to a friend of mine in Ohio.
Yeah, because when the consumers clearly don't care about your pet zealotry campaign clearly the thing to do in the name of "freedom" is force it on them.
Thanks for the words, surely I meant to say something about freedom and I guess I must be a Linux zealot to be making comments against Microsoft's best interest.
Anyhow...
I personally don't think that Real was in any way hurt by WMP. Even if they were, I'm happy about it. Real has been crappy software since around version 3. Before that it had okay compression, for the day, and not many features they didn't need. HOWEVER, the EU thinks that Real was hurt by Microsoft and the Microsoft is monopolizing the industry by bundling. The EU forced them to sell the N version. The EU wanted Microsoft to be punished. They're not doing a very good job by allowing the N version to just be a castrated product with no incentive to be bought while the other regular version is still on the market...FOR THE SAME PRICE!
Am I the only one who's sick of seeing Microsoft get away with crap like
this?
Cheap as in labor. VB programmers are cheaper labor, and many are poorly trained. Microsofties are notorious for spending far more on software than on labor. They think they'll save by paying Microsoft more than they do their employees. So, if you have to pay a VBScripter $30k a year to write ASP and you have to pay a PHPer $50k a year to write PHP then hypothetically you're saving if the VBScripter is only two thirds as productive.
Keep in mind that I, personally, don't believe any of this stuff. I've had it extolled at me before, though.
Is this also what lead to the pop culture phenomenon that is IM speak? SMS was out for how long before ads started showing teens bastardizing the english language in every message?
People wouldn't need to block ads if they weren't so obtrusive and offensive. I would imagine that if advertisement agencies stopped producing obnoxious ads that block you from viewing content, launch endless pop-ups, and are otherwise incredibly annoying then people will stop blocking them. Honestly, who adblocks google ads?
VB development is what convinced them that designing for Microsoft is cheaper, just because there's so much cheap VB development labor. My point was that once they're on that line of thinking they don't seem to come off of it when it comes to things like DHTML and CSS. Try convincing a Microsoftie management type that by making simple adjustments in how a group of web developers do coding you could comply with standards while not driving up costs, driving up production time, or reducing percieved quality of the finished product. A true Microsoftie will brush aside your suggestion with a "Why bother, who uses that other crap anyway?" They seem to get offended if you even suggest complying instead of catering to Microsoft. The thinking is along the lines that any change will cost money.
Ha! I've had similar conversations with my current boss.
Seems that all Microsofties share that sort of thinking. Thing is, I've yet to find anywhere where Microsoft incourages this bit of thinking. This leads me to speculate how they achieve such ubiquity in their advocates... Subliminal messages in the MCP training, perhaps?
Even at that, it doesn't require too much time/effort to attempt to make your website compatible with other browsers. Even before other browsers had 10%+ of the market I was testing my Internet-facing sites to make sure they were at the very least viewable in the other browsers. Then if I happened to use a few IE-only features I'd just make sure they were add-ons to the design. Thus, my IE-using clientele and majority of visitors got a rich experience, but user of alternative browers still got the content. If you build your development process around such thinking then you spend 5% of your time to not alienate 10% of the market.
Slashdot Mirror
No wonder they want this to be a class action suit. Unless they have some evidence that they were subject to click fraud then they have no case on their own.
Sounds an aweful lot like extortion to me.
They do have to sue Google. Google is their vendor. Their alternative to suing Google would be to file a suit against an unknown - or if they suspect a specific company they could name them, but I doubt that's the case - company and subpoena Google for their advertising business's records. It's much more likely to be a longer and more expensive case that way, though.
What they want is this: Google actively monitor's for click fraud. Google sues company X for click fraud. Company Y sues Google for similar damages to what Google got from Company X.
See, they don't really want an end to click fraud. They just want a share of the click fraud profits.
It's more like Ford making cars that can only drive on special roads, roads that no other car company can make cars that drive on. Then Ford patents certain aspects of those roads. After that, Ford uses incentives to convince various others that they should make those roads the only way to drive to their property, eventually convincing highly desirable property owners to switch to these roads. Then, seeing that these roads are the only way to do business with some clients, corporations are forced to start buying Ford cars for their fleets. Soon, there becomes no viable economic reason to buy any other cars for their fleet but Fords.
I could go further, but this analogy thing is starting to annoy even me.
Good luck.
As I said, several support calls yeilded nothing. As soon as I got my connection back they would play it off as fixed or an issue not of their creation and bid me farewell. Their technical support staff is, as pretty much all call center technical support staff, useless.
One thing I did find out in the move: It may have something to do with the splitters other equipment on premises. When I first moved I had a decent connection, but it wasn't as rock solid as it is today. They had my cable turned on but not installed and I was using the previous occupant's setup plus some splitters and cables that I'd brought with me. When the tech finally showed up (took almost three months, but that's another story) he replaced all of the splitters. He proclaimed that even the ones that were only about a year old and had been shipped with the cable modem weren't up to their standards anymore and that iO required a higher quality connection. After he was gone I noticed less dropped packets and I haven't been disconnected since.
Port 80 matters to me because I'd like to use it for other things. On a lot of networks they block connections to other ports than 80, 21, and 443, some are even more overzealous and block 443 and/or 21. So if I want to be relatively sure that I can SSH into my home machine when I'm at random windows box X I have to run on port 443 and hope it's not blocked.
:90 after the IP or domain.
This was a real killer when I was at school and the admins there seemed to think that if you couldn't take your work on a 3.5" disk then you shouldn't take it home. I had to resort to using Yahoo webmail to send my homework to myself because they only allowed outbound connections to port 80. Between school and Optimum Online I was transported back 15 years to a time when the best way to transfer data was via floppy disk.
The more services block port 80 the more that viruses, worms, and the ilk will just run on a non-standard port. It's not like people who fall for phishing schemes would notice the
Your packet loss issues sound familiar to me. When I was living in the next town over it seemed that there was either faulty equipment or the network in that area was oversold. Either way, the net effect was that I had a lot of packet loss issues and I was disconnected every couple of hours. Every time I was disconnected the only way the help-desk could get me reconnected was to have me hard-boot the modem (unplug it and plug it back in, no power switch). Several calls didn't fix this issue.
What did fix the issue was moving. When I came to my present residence I found a faster and more reliable network waiting. I've had zero problems, even though I'm using the exact same setup as before.
The point is, OO's network seems to be hit and miss depending on the neighborhood.
Bah. It's usable. I use it every day, and I do upload stuff. I've been capped once, but that was because I downloaded 3GB of OGG files from home to work, at a sustained 0.5mbit (limited more by my company's T-1 being used than my connection). I leave my server connected 24/7, and have very little downtime with my connection.
If you want to complain, you should complain about their port-blocking of 80 and 25. If you want to run a webserver it either must be on a non-standard port or HTTPS. I run mine on 90.
For the record, though, at least it's better than RoadRunner. They cap their upstream lower all the time, and if you have too much downstream traffic they'll switch you over to a business account or disconnect you. It happened to a friend of mine in Ohio.
Yeah, I know.
If he had an old air-traffic radar it'd be a different - and perhaps more interesting - story.
See, I'm a shmuck with a radar detector, and that thing goes nuts every time I drive past Newark Airport.
The fun of watching every shmuck with a radar detector slam on their brakes as they speed past your house?
Thanks for the words, surely I meant to say something about freedom and I guess I must be a Linux zealot to be making comments against Microsoft's best interest.
Anyhow...
I personally don't think that Real was in any way hurt by WMP. Even if they were, I'm happy about it. Real has been crappy software since around version 3. Before that it had okay compression, for the day, and not many features they didn't need. HOWEVER, the EU thinks that Real was hurt by Microsoft and the Microsoft is monopolizing the industry by bundling. The EU forced them to sell the N version. The EU wanted Microsoft to be punished. They're not doing a very good job by allowing the N version to just be a castrated product with no incentive to be bought while the other regular version is still on the market...FOR THE SAME PRICE!
Am I the only one who's sick of seeing Microsoft get away with crap like this?
someone modded that post informative... now that is silly
Mine is not, and I was being a buzzkill.
Go Figure
Obviously your business plan is flawed a step sooner than most.
None when there's no financial benefit in it.
The N version should be forced as the only available version in Europe or they should be forced to sell it at a discount compared to "regular" XP.
Using OSS isn't being friendly to it. It's just using it to enhance your product.
of things that I don't need, can't afford, will never get, but want anyway, updated.
Cheap as in labor. VB programmers are cheaper labor, and many are poorly trained. Microsofties are notorious for spending far more on software than on labor. They think they'll save by paying Microsoft more than they do their employees. So, if you have to pay a VBScripter $30k a year to write ASP and you have to pay a PHPer $50k a year to write PHP then hypothetically you're saving if the VBScripter is only two thirds as productive.
Keep in mind that I, personally, don't believe any of this stuff. I've had it extolled at me before, though.
It'd be a flipbook animation. But instead of the book, each cell would be in a new pop-up ad.
Is this also what lead to the pop culture phenomenon that is IM speak? SMS was out for how long before ads started showing teens bastardizing the english language in every message?
People wouldn't need to block ads if they weren't so obtrusive and offensive. I would imagine that if advertisement agencies stopped producing obnoxious ads that block you from viewing content, launch endless pop-ups, and are otherwise incredibly annoying then people will stop blocking them. Honestly, who adblocks google ads?
VB development is what convinced them that designing for Microsoft is cheaper, just because there's so much cheap VB development labor. My point was that once they're on that line of thinking they don't seem to come off of it when it comes to things like DHTML and CSS. Try convincing a Microsoftie management type that by making simple adjustments in how a group of web developers do coding you could comply with standards while not driving up costs, driving up production time, or reducing percieved quality of the finished product. A true Microsoftie will brush aside your suggestion with a "Why bother, who uses that other crap anyway?" They seem to get offended if you even suggest complying instead of catering to Microsoft. The thinking is along the lines that any change will cost money.
[devilsadvocate]But if it costs 20% more to get 15% more business then why do it?[/devilsadvocate]
The cheapness of VB development has many people convinced that developing for Microsoft products is always the quickest and cheapest.
...or they could be using ActiveX plugins, VBScript, or WMP.
Maybe they don't read books and just find the msdn library easier? Wait, who am I kidding?
Ha! I've had similar conversations with my current boss.
Seems that all Microsofties share that sort of thinking. Thing is, I've yet to find anywhere where Microsoft incourages this bit of thinking. This leads me to speculate how they achieve such ubiquity in their advocates... Subliminal messages in the MCP training, perhaps?
Even at that, it doesn't require too much time/effort to attempt to make your website compatible with other browsers. Even before other browsers had 10%+ of the market I was testing my Internet-facing sites to make sure they were at the very least viewable in the other browsers. Then if I happened to use a few IE-only features I'd just make sure they were add-ons to the design. Thus, my IE-using clientele and majority of visitors got a rich experience, but user of alternative browers still got the content. If you build your development process around such thinking then you spend 5% of your time to not alienate 10% of the market.