As a long-time consumer of abandonware, this is horrible news. If the product is not available for sale, I would aruge that common sense dictates that the public sharing of the product hurts nobody as the copyright is not being actively protected! The persecution of Abandonware when the programme is still available for purchase as part of a 'legacy' series is understandable, but otherwise it is rediculous.
Besides, the ability to play the games that I once oggled over in PC Gamber but couldn't afford is really quite something.
There's an option in Word XP (maybe other versions as well, I am not familiar) to set the background to Blue and the text to White, in the Preferences. I find this can really help with eye strain when working on a document for a prolonged period of time.
Hope this helps. While it might not be personally applicable, most people do use Word XP so I thought it could be a possible answer.
Come now, people, if there was an inherent flaw of this magnitude in the Windows XP upgrade, this would be more widespread.
Windows XP could be a contributing factor, but NOT necessarily the causation. It's hard to speculate on a matter like this, but if I had to put money down I'd put it on shoddy IT work. Microsoft's an easy excuse.
This opinion might be unpopular, but the anti-Microsoft groupthink should be challenged from time to time. Did anybody else entertain this idea or is it just me - I'm not in the IT industry, so this could be more widespread than the article would lead me to believe.
Even the Nmap Author seems to agree that it could help in the fight against these undesirable script kiddies, etc. However, I think it is great that this author has brought this to public attention, and will hopefully increase oversight of these cyber-investigations.
Of course, we do need law enforcement and this is a legitimate field to investigate so that we can have protected web commerce. With eyes on their activities, we can hopefully keep the Internet free and safe. Thoughts?
Cudos to Microsoft for a great move that should hopefully encourage customers to report on their pre-installed pirated copies of Windows XP. Rather than attacking the user, they can go to the supplier. This can only be a move in the right direction, in my opinion, and I feel this sort of move should be lauded and supported by the general public.
I'm curious to see what the general reaction to this move is.
Once again, a case of politicians that can't grasp the concept of a transnational entity that doesn't fit into their neat little system of sovereign nation states.
The internet doesn't fit into their world view, and therefore they're destined to fail with legislation such as this. One could draw parallels with other transnational organizations that the United States doesn't seem to understand, but that could be a bit of a stretch.
You raise a valid point in there.. it reminds me of those large bookstores that took the market share in Canada.
Our local Chapters bookstore (an extremely large bookstore, with Starbucks, music, gifts, etc.) popped up, filled with wonderful chairs and beautiful features. After they destroyed the rest of the market, had their captive audience, the quality of service declined - the comfy chairs dissapeared because goodness, it cost far too much money to have people in there simply enjoying themselves and not consuming!
Interesting to see if Google follows the same model.. at least theres MSN search to keep them on their toes! Healthy competition is good, for the enduser at least.
So Google included Keyhole in its list of tools, which now takes another click (on more >> from the google homepage) to get to it. Heaven forbid that Google would do anything remotely business-like.
Quite frankly, Google is a corporation, and if they can help Keyhole get a few more customers (who need the service for whatever reason) while making a few dollars on the side, I think we should accept it as completely legitimate.
And no, I don't think this is the start of a slippery slope of Google into outrageous commercialism.
Given that I've seen digital cameras that are far smaller than even the tiniest camera phones, it seems like a knee-jerk reaction to condemn camera phones. I can understand the banning of camera phones from a workplace, but only if cameras in general are banned. Otherwise, it's an arbitrary knee-jerk reaction.
Besides, the image quality is quite poor on camera phones as opposed to an equal-sized (and equally small) digital camera.
Third party would be best, but clearly (heck, or unclearly) one of the big two is going to eventually win. Douglas Adams said it best IMHO:
On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people.' 'Odd,' said Arthur, 'I thought you said it was a democracy.' 'I did,' said Ford. 'It is.' 'So,' said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, 'why don't people get rid of the lizards?' 'It honestly doesn't occur to them,' said Ford. 'They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want.' 'You mean they actually vote for the lizards?' 'Oh yes,' said Ford with a shrug, 'of course.' 'But,' said Arthur, going for the big one again, 'why?' 'Because if they didn't vote for a lizard,' said Ford, 'the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?'
Slashdot Mirror
As a long-time consumer of abandonware, this is horrible news. If the product is not available for sale, I would aruge that common sense dictates that the public sharing of the product hurts nobody as the copyright is not being actively protected! The persecution of Abandonware when the programme is still available for purchase as part of a 'legacy' series is understandable, but otherwise it is rediculous.
Besides, the ability to play the games that I once oggled over in PC Gamber but couldn't afford is really quite something.
There's an option in Word XP (maybe other versions as well, I am not familiar) to set the background to Blue and the text to White, in the Preferences. I find this can really help with eye strain when working on a document for a prolonged period of time.
Hope this helps. While it might not be personally applicable, most people do use Word XP so I thought it could be a possible answer.
Come now, people, if there was an inherent flaw of this magnitude in the Windows XP upgrade, this would be more widespread.
Windows XP could be a contributing factor, but NOT necessarily the causation. It's hard to speculate on a matter like this, but if I had to put money down I'd put it on shoddy IT work. Microsoft's an easy excuse.
This opinion might be unpopular, but the anti-Microsoft groupthink should be challenged from time to time. Did anybody else entertain this idea or is it just me - I'm not in the IT industry, so this could be more widespread than the article would lead me to believe.
Thank you, I should have been more precise and caught that. That'll teach me to be hasty in my posts.
Even the Nmap Author seems to agree that it could help in the fight against these undesirable script kiddies, etc. However, I think it is great that this author has brought this to public attention, and will hopefully increase oversight of these cyber-investigations.
Of course, we do need law enforcement and this is a legitimate field to investigate so that we can have protected web commerce. With eyes on their activities, we can hopefully keep the Internet free and safe. Thoughts?
Cudos to Microsoft for a great move that should hopefully encourage customers to report on their pre-installed pirated copies of Windows XP. Rather than attacking the user, they can go to the supplier. This can only be a move in the right direction, in my opinion, and I feel this sort of move should be lauded and supported by the general public.
I'm curious to see what the general reaction to this move is.
Once again, a case of politicians that can't grasp the concept of a transnational entity that doesn't fit into their neat little system of sovereign nation states.
The internet doesn't fit into their world view, and therefore they're destined to fail with legislation such as this. One could draw parallels with other transnational organizations that the United States doesn't seem to understand, but that could be a bit of a stretch.
You raise a valid point in there.. it reminds me of those large bookstores that took the market share in Canada.
Our local Chapters bookstore (an extremely large bookstore, with Starbucks, music, gifts, etc.) popped up, filled with wonderful chairs and beautiful features. After they destroyed the rest of the market, had their captive audience, the quality of service declined - the comfy chairs dissapeared because goodness, it cost far too much money to have people in there simply enjoying themselves and not consuming!
Interesting to see if Google follows the same model.. at least theres MSN search to keep them on their toes! Healthy competition is good, for the enduser at least.
So Google included Keyhole in its list of tools, which now takes another click (on more >> from the google homepage) to get to it. Heaven forbid that Google would do anything remotely business-like.
Quite frankly, Google is a corporation, and if they can help Keyhole get a few more customers (who need the service for whatever reason) while making a few dollars on the side, I think we should accept it as completely legitimate.
And no, I don't think this is the start of a slippery slope of Google into outrageous commercialism.
Given that I've seen digital cameras that are far smaller than even the tiniest camera phones, it seems like a knee-jerk reaction to condemn camera phones. I can understand the banning of camera phones from a workplace, but only if cameras in general are banned. Otherwise, it's an arbitrary knee-jerk reaction.
Besides, the image quality is quite poor on camera phones as opposed to an equal-sized (and equally small) digital camera.
Third party would be best, but clearly (heck, or unclearly) one of the big two is going to eventually win. Douglas Adams said it best IMHO: On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people.' 'Odd,' said Arthur, 'I thought you said it was a democracy.' 'I did,' said Ford. 'It is.' 'So,' said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, 'why don't people get rid of the lizards?' 'It honestly doesn't occur to them,' said Ford. 'They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want.' 'You mean they actually vote for the lizards?' 'Oh yes,' said Ford with a shrug, 'of course.' 'But,' said Arthur, going for the big one again, 'why?' 'Because if they didn't vote for a lizard,' said Ford, 'the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?'