Way more interesting than the interview.
"Thank God for Apple and Open Source (tm) for making Microsoft a competitor!"
"They're making a superior product because they can't buy the competition!!!"
Microsoft will always be the most popular topic on Slashdot, and that says alot.
I find nothing wrong with it if it would bring the price down. It was interesting to read recently that the price of Vista is rumored to debut at $99, which some people at MS consider a low price (?) Apparently Microsoft is hoping people will have a more positive incentive to upgrade to the new software, instead of letting their existing OS slip into obsoletion. Of course, this would also mean more people would go out to the stores and buy the OS, raising profit margins and revenue...
I still consider that $99 to be a high price to pay for an operating system, but the price of MS Office is just rediculous. Microsoft Office Professional Edition is retailing on Amazon for $404.99. If there is a big transition to OpenOffice maybe we will see some real competition and that price will start to come down... but from the looks of it MS would probably lower it to $350 and call it a good deal. For people who really need the software and are on a low budget these prices are truly crippling.
Perhaps this is the most logical use for the technology. Maybe if people are commercially motivated to use the technology it will actually work? Right now it seems to be horrendously unreliable compared to regular P2P networks, but that is just my experience.
I agree. Advanced emulation will be the key for Linux, if it wants to have enough mainstream success to rival Windows as a serious home operating system. Someone should be able to buy an application with XP labeled on it, slap it into a Linux-based machine, and wham, it works. The foundation is there, all that is needed is some kind of complete compatibility with Windows no questions asked. Microsoft will probably try to crush this when it does occur (as it has tried to crush all innovation and competition in the past), but it will mark the turning point if it can be done. At this point there would nothing but a 100% pure incentive to switch away from Windows
Whats more rediculous is that there is an entire community of nerds that isn't satisfied just making software and letting people use it - they have to defeat the big, bad evil Microsoft and devote hours of their time to talking about it.
Give me a break people. Microsoft is just some company, its not the anti-christ. Its annoying and the only people who really care are these software elitists that make people not want to even download anything like Firefox.
Linux will never be better than Windows and Firefox will never be better than IE until you start recognizing that they both in many ways have a superior interface. Instead, you people blindly convince each other that the products you use are superior, when in fact, you are some 5% minority on the entire planet.
Until then you are doomed to tell yourself "what you want to hear" for eternity
[blockquote]
An example of making a point of "doing something" that looks good on camera and in the newspapers, but doesn't actually accomplish anything.[/blockquote]
You're wrong this time. People think politicans are all liars, but they're only liars when people will believe the lie. Sometimes proposals come out of Washington that sound so nuts you may not believe they're for real. But make no mistake about it, if they can make a bill pass they will do it. The suspension of belief in what they are saying they will do is exactly what leads to tyranical and reactionary reforms. Its exactly what lets a republic fall into a dictatorship. The biggest trick of the politician is making you think he doesn't mean to do exactly what he says he will do.
The politician only lies when he knows the reward is worth the risk, just like any coniver. But ultimately they always prefer to do it the old fashioned way - make you so disenfranchised, apathetic, and uneducated that you'll just agree with whatever they say.
Anytime a politician mentions any of those three, scrutinize verrrry carefully. Hardly anybody agrees that anyone from those groups should have any rights whatsover. This makes them perfect for bringing in practices and punishments that would otherwise be unacceptable. Call me a cynic, but anything that is OKed to do to them will slowly be expanded to others.
Bingo, somebody got it. By the time these people figure it out it'll be too late. And besides, people who look at the plausibility of situations like this in a historical context are branded "conspiracy theorists" and "anarchists"
When these reforms are enacted, be sure to stay within your demonstration zone as well or you will be taser'd
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -1759
If you have enough technical know-how you should be able to manage where your files are on the system, at least to the degree that you can get things done. Has anyone considered the possibility that this feature may not be very practical from a user standpoint? What is this really but a faux scheme that allows you to pretend your files are "where you want them"?
I can imagine this new implementation to be exploited quite expediently by virus writers and other malicious attackers. Soon, no one will know where there files are on a Windows machine.
This may seem skeptical, but I have a feeling that this is just another feature that will be "turned off", if possible, by people who know what they are doing.
The precise reason that illegal file sharing of music has been so popular is because music has been overpriced for a long time. Once these labels recover the initial production costs of the album, it is nothing but profit. Most concerts are organized for the artist to make a buck, but even then the labels take the lion's share.
The labels seem to enjoy profiting at the expense of both the listener and the artist. People who avoid buying music at all costs simply see through this. The others don't, which is why you see a bunch of crap on the Billboard charts and particularly the iTunes "Top Downloads". Who is buying this crap? Not anyone with a brain
Slashdot Mirror
Way more interesting than the interview. "Thank God for Apple and Open Source (tm) for making Microsoft a competitor!" "They're making a superior product because they can't buy the competition!!!" Microsoft will always be the most popular topic on Slashdot, and that says alot.
As more and more viruses are created and "contracted" by computer systems, more and more security fixes are released. It's evolution, baby.
I find nothing wrong with it if it would bring the price down. It was interesting to read recently that the price of Vista is rumored to debut at $99, which some people at MS consider a low price (?) Apparently Microsoft is hoping people will have a more positive incentive to upgrade to the new software, instead of letting their existing OS slip into obsoletion. Of course, this would also mean more people would go out to the stores and buy the OS, raising profit margins and revenue... I still consider that $99 to be a high price to pay for an operating system, but the price of MS Office is just rediculous. Microsoft Office Professional Edition is retailing on Amazon for $404.99. If there is a big transition to OpenOffice maybe we will see some real competition and that price will start to come down... but from the looks of it MS would probably lower it to $350 and call it a good deal. For people who really need the software and are on a low budget these prices are truly crippling.
Just got a message: gmail.com: The broken link has been fixed. Thanks for being our first users! The link http://talk.google.com/ now works
Perhaps this is the most logical use for the technology. Maybe if people are commercially motivated to use the technology it will actually work? Right now it seems to be horrendously unreliable compared to regular P2P networks, but that is just my experience.
I agree. Advanced emulation will be the key for Linux, if it wants to have enough mainstream success to rival Windows as a serious home operating system. Someone should be able to buy an application with XP labeled on it, slap it into a Linux-based machine, and wham, it works. The foundation is there, all that is needed is some kind of complete compatibility with Windows no questions asked. Microsoft will probably try to crush this when it does occur (as it has tried to crush all innovation and competition in the past), but it will mark the turning point if it can be done. At this point there would nothing but a 100% pure incentive to switch away from Windows
Whats more rediculous is that there is an entire community of nerds that isn't satisfied just making software and letting people use it - they have to defeat the big, bad evil Microsoft and devote hours of their time to talking about it. Give me a break people. Microsoft is just some company, its not the anti-christ. Its annoying and the only people who really care are these software elitists that make people not want to even download anything like Firefox. Linux will never be better than Windows and Firefox will never be better than IE until you start recognizing that they both in many ways have a superior interface. Instead, you people blindly convince each other that the products you use are superior, when in fact, you are some 5% minority on the entire planet. Until then you are doomed to tell yourself "what you want to hear" for eternity
[blockquote] An example of making a point of "doing something" that looks good on camera and in the newspapers, but doesn't actually accomplish anything.[/blockquote] You're wrong this time. People think politicans are all liars, but they're only liars when people will believe the lie. Sometimes proposals come out of Washington that sound so nuts you may not believe they're for real. But make no mistake about it, if they can make a bill pass they will do it. The suspension of belief in what they are saying they will do is exactly what leads to tyranical and reactionary reforms. Its exactly what lets a republic fall into a dictatorship. The biggest trick of the politician is making you think he doesn't mean to do exactly what he says he will do. The politician only lies when he knows the reward is worth the risk, just like any coniver. But ultimately they always prefer to do it the old fashioned way - make you so disenfranchised, apathetic, and uneducated that you'll just agree with whatever they say.
Bingo, somebody got it. By the time these people figure it out it'll be too late. And besides, people who look at the plausibility of situations like this in a historical context are branded "conspiracy theorists" and "anarchists"
When these reforms are enacted, be sure to stay within your demonstration zone as well or you will be taser'd
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -1759
If you have enough technical know-how you should be able to manage where your files are on the system, at least to the degree that you can get things done. Has anyone considered the possibility that this feature may not be very practical from a user standpoint? What is this really but a faux scheme that allows you to pretend your files are "where you want them"? I can imagine this new implementation to be exploited quite expediently by virus writers and other malicious attackers. Soon, no one will know where there files are on a Windows machine. This may seem skeptical, but I have a feeling that this is just another feature that will be "turned off", if possible, by people who know what they are doing.
The precise reason that illegal file sharing of music has been so popular is because music has been overpriced for a long time. Once these labels recover the initial production costs of the album, it is nothing but profit. Most concerts are organized for the artist to make a buck, but even then the labels take the lion's share. The labels seem to enjoy profiting at the expense of both the listener and the artist. People who avoid buying music at all costs simply see through this. The others don't, which is why you see a bunch of crap on the Billboard charts and particularly the iTunes "Top Downloads". Who is buying this crap? Not anyone with a brain
That copy of Photoshop was being used at the lab in 92 after they discovered time travel