Improbable, having seen that whole issue is in the UK. From what I gather so long as Google don't use the name Gmail within the UK they should have no trademark issues.
You're obviously ignoring Microsoft's power to control its army of developers. Does this ring a bell at all?
DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS
Microsoft dictates the rules, its developers follow closely behind.
Funny you should mention that. Just the other day I decided to give Linux a shot; more specifically, Gentoo. Now, it did take me several days to get it running in an acceptable way--several hours' work. Of course, I had _chosen_ a more advanced distro, so I couldn't have expected anything else.
Unfortunately, weeks later I still suffer from the lack of hardware support, and I shouldn't be expecting things to change any time soon...
This just goes to show how threatened companies feel about alternatives (read: F/OSS).
If you look about it from the global perspective, Microsoft's options caters for just about every audience: from poor to rich, honest and dishonest. Every one of those has a reason to use Windows -- generally it's "but everyone else uses it too!"
It's a shame, really...
Had your small business developed some in-house software which meets all your needs, would you still be happy about some company forcing you to move away?
With all due respect, you're missing the point. It's quite true that there's always room for improvement and that it must be unleashed. Sometimes, however, things might be better off left alone.
Reading through the comments I saw several solutions that would most likely succeed if they were to be implemented. Unfortunately, I feel from the *AA some strong conservatism... In the same way that they had to see themselves besieged by P2P before, I feel the same will happen with movies. Who knows, one day, we'll have efficient, affordable and convenient methods to watch films, however we want. Legally.
Not true. In this case we're not talking about the means of delivery of advertisements (be it Apache, IIS, Macromedia Flash, etc.). That will always exist, and it's most certainly inevitable.
However, when the creators of one of those mediums decides to take advantage of its popularity, it becomes an ethical issue. They have every legal right to do so, certainly. But just how fair is it on those who let them become that popular (and quite possibly profitable) in the first place?
Betrayal, that's what I call it.
The point isn't how much space it takes up per second -- simply consider that the average film will cost less than US$ 100 to reproduce, per copy, as storage is just so damn cheap nowadays. And that's substantially cheaper than £1500 for analogue film rolls. And certainly a whole lot more secure than fibre optic.
Slashdot Mirror
Improbable, having seen that whole issue is in the UK. From what I gather so long as Google don't use the name Gmail within the UK they should have no trademark issues.
'nuff said.
You're obviously ignoring Microsoft's power to control its army of developers. Does this ring a bell at all? DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS Microsoft dictates the rules, its developers follow closely behind.
Funny you should mention that. Just the other day I decided to give Linux a shot; more specifically, Gentoo. Now, it did take me several days to get it running in an acceptable way--several hours' work. Of course, I had _chosen_ a more advanced distro, so I couldn't have expected anything else. Unfortunately, weeks later I still suffer from the lack of hardware support, and I shouldn't be expecting things to change any time soon...
This just goes to show how threatened companies feel about alternatives (read: F/OSS). If you look about it from the global perspective, Microsoft's options caters for just about every audience: from poor to rich, honest and dishonest. Every one of those has a reason to use Windows -- generally it's "but everyone else uses it too!" It's a shame, really...
Had your small business developed some in-house software which meets all your needs, would you still be happy about some company forcing you to move away? With all due respect, you're missing the point. It's quite true that there's always room for improvement and that it must be unleashed. Sometimes, however, things might be better off left alone.
Reading through the comments I saw several solutions that would most likely succeed if they were to be implemented. Unfortunately, I feel from the *AA some strong conservatism... In the same way that they had to see themselves besieged by P2P before, I feel the same will happen with movies. Who knows, one day, we'll have efficient, affordable and convenient methods to watch films, however we want. Legally.
Not true. In this case we're not talking about the means of delivery of advertisements (be it Apache, IIS, Macromedia Flash, etc.). That will always exist, and it's most certainly inevitable. However, when the creators of one of those mediums decides to take advantage of its popularity, it becomes an ethical issue. They have every legal right to do so, certainly. But just how fair is it on those who let them become that popular (and quite possibly profitable) in the first place? Betrayal, that's what I call it.
The point isn't how much space it takes up per second -- simply consider that the average film will cost less than US$ 100 to reproduce, per copy, as storage is just so damn cheap nowadays. And that's substantially cheaper than £1500 for analogue film rolls. And certainly a whole lot more secure than fibre optic.
I'd been eagerly waiting for this release and at last, it's here! Hmm maybe this time I'll adopt freebsd as my primary OS..
How long to go 'till we have media-cracking 52X DVD-burning?