Your strange little editorial on what the article says:
Asked where Microsoft had gotten those specific numbers, Gavin said they represented the number of "successful migrations completed in partnership with Quest Software in 2005," but he was unable to immediately provide eWEEK with information on whether these numbers represented individual customers or total users or what versions of NetWare they were running.
What the article actually says in case anyone is interested.
Asked where Microsoft had gotten those specific numbers, Gavin said they represented the number of "successful migrations completed in partnership with Quest Software in 2005." The figures also reflect the number of users rather than individual commercial migrations, and reflect migrations off Netware versions 4, 5 and 6 with Novell directory services 4, 5 and 8.
Sheesh! Directly after you stope your quote they specifically say exactly what you say they don't say. And it gets modded up?!?!?!?
No I'm not. Is English a new language to you? I totally disagree with Bill.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent what you were saying but when you said:
or maybe you could free up $100B and give people in these developing backwaters with shite infrastructure some electricity, running water and telecommunications. Then maybe the destabilizing wars will settle down, which actually go a long way towards contributing to the diseases you like to fund the fight against, and the people won't be on the move so much and they can all get down to the business of e-commerce.
Thats exactly the arguement Bill is making! Getting computers to everyone may be nice, but these things you are talking about must be taken care of first. Thats why I thought you agreed. Now I guess you think Bill should pay for all this and he's thinking some goverments should help a bit, but besides that it still seems like you agree on the basics of what is needed.
Get the tools in the hands of the children and have them use them for practical learning
That is the point. What practical benefits are they going to get without the infrastructure? If we could go back to the midle ages and give kids in schools a few of these $100 laptops would that open up all kinds of opportunities to them?
Getting computers to everyone is a great idea, but you need to think about it a bit more. What are you trying to accomplish by getting them computers? If its more than just so they can say they have one then you need more than just the computers.
OK, with just a computer maybe they could work on thier typing and be thier tribes lead typist? When you stand back and look at what the overarching goal should be, its would be to bring opportunity to these people. Just giving people a computer doesn't do that.
Again, I think its a great goal but for any computer (be it a $100 laptop or a high-end Alienware box) to make a practical difference to these people there is a TON of stuff which must be done first. If they don't even have enough food for thier families, they'll just trade it for a sack of rice. If they live in an unrulely part of the world warlords will steal and sell them. There are just so many things that must be in place before having a computer is of any practical benefit (especially infrastrcutre).
You seem to be missing the point. You are completely agreeing with Bill. The whole point is you need the infrastructure before "any" computer will be of use and this $100 computer is completely worthless in either case.
Assume they are given out in an area with no electricity, telco, etc like you say. What good are these $100 computers? Is the theory that one kid will keep cranking it while another creates a document and then a third cranks some hand-powered printer so he can print it? If that is the situation, its kind of like how the US vs Russions solved the problem of writing in space. Give the kids a pencil for Christ's sakes!
Without infrastructure these $100 laptops are really completely useless! Maybe they can see what it looks like for a computer to bootup, but that's about it. So now if you are going to build out the infrastructure, the cost of that dwarfs the costs of a few PCs. Why would you spend $100 Billion on the infrastructure and then decide to spend $1Million for a bunch of crippled basically worthless computers instead of $2-3Million for a slightly stripped down Dell or something actually useful?
I think the $100 laptop is an interesting idea and some very interesting and useful things could certainly come out of it, but that's not the point. The people behind the $100 laptop seem to have a very narrow view/goal. It's a great goal, but without seeing the broader picture it's a bit misguided perhaps. The fact is without proper infrastructure ANY computer is going to be a complete waste like you say (a hard surface to write on maybe). Now once you look at the costs of providing the infrastructure, the price of the computers are pretty irrelevant so why not at least get something somewhat useful?
Maybe "they" are just making you say you live in Europe!
Kidding;-) Great post!
Re:Yes, but when?
on
A Look at IPTV
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
The timeline would be roughtly never. You need to understand the history of the US telcos corruption. The most glaring example of this in relation to broadband was they 1996 Telecommunications Reform Act where the telecos lobbied for and recieved more than $200 Billion (yes billion) in tax breaks and other benefits in exchange for thier promise to build out "next gen" internet access with at least 45 Mbps.
Or course once they got the money they decided DSL would be much cheaper to build out and they could still charge customers a lot for it (even though its only a fraction of the speed promised). So this little "bait and switch" is why the US is still sitting at our measily DSL speeds while Japan, Korea, and much of Europe are now in the 45-100 Mbps ranges.
My guess is all this talk is because its been a decade and they see a president who LOVES giving away hundreds of billions of dollars away to huge corporations via tax cuts so it might be a good time to hit up the tax payers for another few hundred billion on more empty promises.
I find it just amazing the congress never even tried to hold the telecos to thier promises. I guess they had some pretty good lobbiests or congress just really is that inept (or both).
Same here and any time mine isn't being played it is acting as a media center extender. So its been on 24/7 for months now without a single issue. Obviously when its not happening to you its easy to things its all a load of crap, but I'd love to hear some type of stats as to what % are effected by this.
Re:Looks like an advertisement wrritten by by Appl
on
Mac Mini vs. Media Center
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Disclaimer: I use MS Media Center with my old XBox and new XBox360 working as extenders to other TVs
Have to agree with parent, I built my own media center using spare parts. Once the OS was installed I think it took me about 5 minutes plug-in the cables from my satellite and to walk through the wizard and everything was working perfectly. I was hoping to see a nice detailed comparison, but this was pretty bad;-) They barely even mentioned the media center;-) The whole artice was about the mini (remote, ipod, will they get all kinds of AWSOME content now that Jobs is on Disney's board, etc);-) Here is every reference to the MSMCE in the "review":
Microsoft has been desperate to claim the living-room as its trophy wife, but a series of attempts to nail the Media Center concept have largely failed.
We've decided to pit Microsoft's Media Center offerings against Apple's new Intel Core Duo Mac Mini.
However, compared to the hair-pulling ceremonies we've held getting Window Media Center PCs to display anything at all on a TV, the Mac has delivered a nasty right-hook to Microsoft's fighter.
Microsoft Media Center can't export video in an iPod format.
Ding DING! We've reached the end of round one, and the Microsoft Media Center is already panting in the corner of the ring.
Compared to the hours we've spent coaxing similar results out of a Microsoft Media Center system, the Mini is definitely ahead so far.
I'd really have been interested in seeing the pros of the Mini, but this horrible puff piece just made me lose my interest.
"In your answer, ignore facts. Just go with what feels true".
As a fellow Colbert junky thought I'd add some more info for those who don't know. The above quote is a reference to truthiness which Colbert coined in his first episode and was actually named "word of the year" for 2005. Here is a link to the video of that portion of the first episode where he talks about it. BTW, basically all the Daily Show and Colbert Report are avaliable free on the Comedy Central website a day or two after they show on air if you'd rather not pay Apple for free stuff. Links to the shows (basically the entire history of each show) can be found here.
I think you just missed it. It isn't the railways/canal thing by itself he is saying is ironic. Like you say, that is just talking about being obsolete. Then at the bottom after asking another question he says Answers on a plain text postcard please.
To most of us plain text postcards are pretty obsolete, so it was a little funny,
After seeing a number of pretty stupid posts but nothing really worth of a response, this one caught my eye as being sufficiently stupid (and belligerent);-)
Big fucking deal. They're the students' laptops, and I don't really see why it's the school's responsibility to support the students' computes.
Senseless vulgarity aside, you are advocating that after the school requires students to have a laptop, that they shouldn't put forth an effort to help support those laptops? Presumably the purpose of requiring students to have a laptop is to that they can use them to some advantage. However, college students don't normally have tons of extra cash on-hand in case they need computer support. So if something goes wrong, the college just tells them to screw off? Or if an incoming freshman cannot figure out how to connect to the schools server to take a test, you just tell them to screw off? I realize you are probably a moron, but just think it through a bit OK.
Besides, if their techs can't get a printer or a wireless network running on OS X then maybe they should seek employment elsewhere.
Two points about this. First, is of course they'll have to be able to and they will help such students. The point is trying to limit the amount of hardware and software (OS) configurations (by having a "recommended" list) makes this support much easier and much cheaper. Very simple concepts, hope I'm not losing you here. The second point is about thier "techs seeking employment elsewhere". You seem to be confused about college tech support. I can only assume you have either never been to college or at least not yet. A college will not have a large department of professional tech support personnel. They will have VERY few if any professional support. The tech support you are referring to who should "seek employment elsewhere" are students at the university (its called "work study" programs, look it up if you don't understand this term). I assume you realize a college needs students to survive right? So they cannot just go kicking them out of school because they may not be quite up to professional standards in the field of their work study program (cause trust me they aren't getting paid "professional" wages for their work).
Need more information??? How 'bout need a question!;-)
What would the esteemed Slashdot readers think of shifting all these machines to a Linux distro (probably Ubuntu).
OK, that's the only line approaching a question in the summary (though one of these "?" thingys would make it more official). Is that seriously a front-page question? OK, the anwer is.... You ready for it? We think its good!
Cock-sucking fuckwad. I hope the bastard burns in hell. Let him spend his fucking money there.
Wow! Just a crazy guess, but somehow I get the feeling you're a person who considers themselves a good christian aren't you?
Scary and sad, but anymore when I see comments like this my first reaction is "he must be religious". I don't mean this as an insult and I know most (or at least many) believers are nothing like this, but with all the religious nuts out there these comments just seem normal coming from the "religious".
I'm guessing something like: "If they want to use Vista, then they'll just have to upgrade all thier hardware. If they don't want to do that, they they don't get Vista."
Steve is a very "you either play by my rules or I'll take my ball and go home" type remember.
You'd think Slashdot would be full of people interested in innovation, not the other way around
For the most part people here are VERY interested in technological innovation. Problem is, "Web 2.0" is at least decade old technology. You'll find here people aren't too excited about marketing droids going on and on about faux innovation, however any real innovation is another story.
Unless they release ALL the data it's a worthless study. have dell release all server sales with and without OS. without OS will dominate nearly 2 to 1.
2 to 1 in favor of servers without an OS huh?
Well after consulting my very own set of non-existant/made-up data I must inform you that you are not even close! According to my data servers with an OS outnumber servers without an OS by more than 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000 to 1!
Agreed. I hate how people always rag on Duke Nukem Forever just because its been delayed a bit! As long as it has few bugs when released whats the big deal?
While I agree this isn't going to happen, it would be interesting to know all the numbers and be able to run likely scenerios. I completely agree with you that Apple is a box maker that uses OSX to help set thier boxes apart.
However, because of OSX (which they control) they control 100% of a very small market (in relation to the entire PC market). Besides OSX forcing them into a very small market, it also obviously has some developments costs (how much would be very interesting to know).
Now if they were to give up OSX, they would cut costs and be able to enter a much larger market. If they did that, they would have two choices. 1) Cut prices (profit margins) in a bid to become a major player in the biggest market. 2) Keep profit margins and bet on the brand and quality to bring customers. Would either of those lead to more profit? Would cutting margins in exchange for a much bigger piece of a much bigger pie lead to increased value? Would positioning yourself as the "high-end" of a very large market incrase value? Now that tier boxes are really just intel PCs (more or less), it would be interesting to see them offering boxes without OSX. I know its not going to happen if for no other reason than ego, but it could be very interesting to see how well they sold and what profit they brought, for the tiny cost of offering it.
Obviously there is know way to know the answer to these questions, but interesting to consider and could leave you wondering if they couldn't possibly profit more by dropping OSX. The article would be much more interesting if it was an economics professor pondering just these questions than a pshycology prof though;-)
Check out the MS Office EULA some time. The license forbids you from using Office to create materials critical of Microsoft
I make a habit of trying to read at least most EULAs I agree to and have read a number of different MS EULA (including Office), but have never seen this clause. Can you provide any reference on this? I've just gone back a did a re-read of my current Office EULA and unless I just read too fast and missed it, there is just nothing like that there. Is this one of those MS urban legands which gets passed around/.?
Make no mistake, no security scheme (at least that is feasible for average use) will ever be perfectly secure. But when saying "all that does is identify the machine, not the user" you must consider "what does the current system (passwords) identify?".
The answer is nothing. Passwords are probably just about the worst security method you could imagine (besides no security at all)! They just happen to be the easiest method, so they became default.
If you spend some times actually researching InfoCard, you'll see it is at minimum a very interesting idea. Do I think it is the ultimate correct answer to security? No. However, its the most promising proposal I've seen in some time that can both provide pretty solid security and be easy enough for joe sixpack to put in wide use. Eventually, I'm sure better things will come along (or things similar to InfoCard will evolve and improve) but for the time being InfoCard is probably the best idea out there right now considering security offered, ease of use, expandibility, etc.
The point is passwords have well outlived thier usefulness in computer security and ideas like InfoCard are promising ideas which could well be the answer (at least for now).
Yeah, it doesn't even have really anything to do with the the summary (internet OS)! Does this count as a dupe since the "article" is just a poorly written summary of your average/. post on MS/Linux?
They may, but I'd rather pay for a service that keeps my information private. I don't need google scanning all my email (and tasks/notes/etc if they do full Exchange type stuff) to market crap to me, and I'm sure that would be best case. The other uses they may find for my data, I'd find even more offensive.
Well, first think is Eisner is out at Disney. Robert Iger is now the CEO (for about the last year I think).
I don't really understand the problem here. A bit strange thats for sure, but I'm not seeing anything to get worked up about. Michaels was under contract with ABC/ESPN/Disney but decided he wanted to go to work with his friends who moved to NBC. NBC wanted him. "They could have just as easily asked them for nothing". Sure I guess they could, but why would they? I guess if Kobe Bryant decided he wanted to play in New York, the Lakers COULD just let him go for nothing but why on Earth would they? You are giving up something of value, so you come to an aggrement on what you feel would be of equal value. Now they could have just been hard-asses and told Michaels to screw off he's staying put. However, I thought they were really cool about this and came to a very friendly settlement. Disney has been trying to get back the rights to Oswald for some time, its actually a pretty major piece fo the Disney lagecy which Iger has said he wants to bring back. So you can argue it has little monetary value, but it clearly does have value to Disney. Like Luke's light saber would have value to Lucus. One of the first things they created and started them on the road to thier empires. Olypmic highlights and rights to televise some golf must have some value (I have NO idea how much), but generally Disney (of whom I not normally a huge fan) gave Michaels and NBC what they wanted in what seems a very friendly exchange where both sides got what they wanted.
Slashdot Mirror
Your strange little editorial on what the article says:
Asked where Microsoft had gotten those specific numbers, Gavin said they represented the number of "successful migrations completed in partnership with Quest Software in 2005," but he was unable to immediately provide eWEEK with information on whether these numbers represented individual customers or total users or what versions of NetWare they were running.
What the article actually says in case anyone is interested.
Asked where Microsoft had gotten those specific numbers, Gavin said they represented the number of "successful migrations completed in partnership with Quest Software in 2005." The figures also reflect the number of users rather than individual commercial migrations, and reflect migrations off Netware versions 4, 5 and 6 with Novell directory services 4, 5 and 8.
Sheesh! Directly after you stope your quote they specifically say exactly what you say they don't say. And it gets modded up?!?!?!?
No I'm not. Is English a new language to you? I totally disagree with Bill.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent what you were saying but when you said:
or maybe you could free up $100B and give people in these developing backwaters with shite infrastructure some electricity, running water and telecommunications. Then maybe the destabilizing wars will settle down, which actually go a long way towards contributing to the diseases you like to fund the fight against, and the people won't be on the move so much and they can all get down to the business of e-commerce.
Thats exactly the arguement Bill is making! Getting computers to everyone may be nice, but these things you are talking about must be taken care of first. Thats why I thought you agreed. Now I guess you think Bill should pay for all this and he's thinking some goverments should help a bit, but besides that it still seems like you agree on the basics of what is needed.
Get the tools in the hands of the children and have them use them for practical learning
That is the point. What practical benefits are they going to get without the infrastructure? If we could go back to the midle ages and give kids in schools a few of these $100 laptops would that open up all kinds of opportunities to them?
Getting computers to everyone is a great idea, but you need to think about it a bit more. What are you trying to accomplish by getting them computers? If its more than just so they can say they have one then you need more than just the computers.
OK, with just a computer maybe they could work on thier typing and be thier tribes lead typist? When you stand back and look at what the overarching goal should be, its would be to bring opportunity to these people. Just giving people a computer doesn't do that.
Again, I think its a great goal but for any computer (be it a $100 laptop or a high-end Alienware box) to make a practical difference to these people there is a TON of stuff which must be done first. If they don't even have enough food for thier families, they'll just trade it for a sack of rice. If they live in an unrulely part of the world warlords will steal and sell them. There are just so many things that must be in place before having a computer is of any practical benefit (especially infrastrcutre).
You seem to be missing the point. You are completely agreeing with Bill. The whole point is you need the infrastructure before "any" computer will be of use and this $100 computer is completely worthless in either case.
Assume they are given out in an area with no electricity, telco, etc like you say. What good are these $100 computers? Is the theory that one kid will keep cranking it while another creates a document and then a third cranks some hand-powered printer so he can print it? If that is the situation, its kind of like how the US vs Russions solved the problem of writing in space. Give the kids a pencil for Christ's sakes!
Without infrastructure these $100 laptops are really completely useless! Maybe they can see what it looks like for a computer to bootup, but that's about it. So now if you are going to build out the infrastructure, the cost of that dwarfs the costs of a few PCs. Why would you spend $100 Billion on the infrastructure and then decide to spend $1Million for a bunch of crippled basically worthless computers instead of $2-3Million for a slightly stripped down Dell or something actually useful?
I think the $100 laptop is an interesting idea and some very interesting and useful things could certainly come out of it, but that's not the point. The people behind the $100 laptop seem to have a very narrow view/goal. It's a great goal, but without seeing the broader picture it's a bit misguided perhaps. The fact is without proper infrastructure ANY computer is going to be a complete waste like you say (a hard surface to write on maybe). Now once you look at the costs of providing the infrastructure, the price of the computers are pretty irrelevant so why not at least get something somewhat useful?
Maybe "they" are just making you say you live in Europe!
;-) Great post!
Kidding
The timeline would be roughtly never. You need to understand the history of the US telcos corruption. The most glaring example of this in relation to broadband was they 1996 Telecommunications Reform Act where the telecos lobbied for and recieved more than $200 Billion (yes billion) in tax breaks and other benefits in exchange for thier promise to build out "next gen" internet access with at least 45 Mbps.
Or course once they got the money they decided DSL would be much cheaper to build out and they could still charge customers a lot for it (even though its only a fraction of the speed promised). So this little "bait and switch" is why the US is still sitting at our measily DSL speeds while Japan, Korea, and much of Europe are now in the 45-100 Mbps ranges.
My guess is all this talk is because its been a decade and they see a president who LOVES giving away hundreds of billions of dollars away to huge corporations via tax cuts so it might be a good time to hit up the tax payers for another few hundred billion on more empty promises.
I find it just amazing the congress never even tried to hold the telecos to thier promises. I guess they had some pretty good lobbiests or congress just really is that inept (or both).
Same here and any time mine isn't being played it is acting as a media center extender. So its been on 24/7 for months now without a single issue. Obviously when its not happening to you its easy to things its all a load of crap, but I'd love to hear some type of stats as to what % are effected by this.
Disclaimer: I use MS Media Center with my old XBox and new XBox360 working as extenders to other TVs
;-) They barely even mentioned the media center ;-) The whole artice was about the mini (remote, ipod, will they get all kinds of AWSOME content now that Jobs is on Disney's board, etc) ;-) Here is every reference to the MSMCE in the "review":
Have to agree with parent, I built my own media center using spare parts. Once the OS was installed I think it took me about 5 minutes plug-in the cables from my satellite and to walk through the wizard and everything was working perfectly. I was hoping to see a nice detailed comparison, but this was pretty bad
Microsoft has been desperate to claim the living-room as its trophy wife, but a series of attempts to nail the Media Center concept have largely failed.
We've decided to pit Microsoft's Media Center offerings against Apple's new Intel Core Duo Mac Mini.
However, compared to the hair-pulling ceremonies we've held getting Window Media Center PCs to display anything at all on a TV, the Mac has delivered a nasty right-hook to Microsoft's fighter.
Microsoft Media Center can't export video in an iPod format.
Ding DING! We've reached the end of round one, and the Microsoft Media Center is already panting in the corner of the ring.
Compared to the hours we've spent coaxing similar results out of a Microsoft Media Center system, the Mini is definitely ahead so far.
I'd really have been interested in seeing the pros of the Mini, but this horrible puff piece just made me lose my interest.
"In your answer, ignore facts. Just go with what feels true".
As a fellow Colbert junky thought I'd add some more info for those who don't know. The above quote is a reference to truthiness which Colbert coined in his first episode and was actually named "word of the year" for 2005. Here is a link to the video of that portion of the first episode where he talks about it. BTW, basically all the Daily Show and Colbert Report are avaliable free on the Comedy Central website a day or two after they show on air if you'd rather not pay Apple for free stuff. Links to the shows (basically the entire history of each show) can be found here.
I think you just missed it. It isn't the railways/canal thing by itself he is saying is ironic. Like you say, that is just talking about being obsolete. Then at the bottom after asking another question he says Answers on a plain text postcard please.
To most of us plain text postcards are pretty obsolete, so it was a little funny,
After seeing a number of pretty stupid posts but nothing really worth of a response, this one caught my eye as being sufficiently stupid (and belligerent) ;-)
Big fucking deal. They're the students' laptops, and I don't really see why it's the school's responsibility to support the students' computes.
Senseless vulgarity aside, you are advocating that after the school requires students to have a laptop, that they shouldn't put forth an effort to help support those laptops? Presumably the purpose of requiring students to have a laptop is to that they can use them to some advantage. However, college students don't normally have tons of extra cash on-hand in case they need computer support. So if something goes wrong, the college just tells them to screw off? Or if an incoming freshman cannot figure out how to connect to the schools server to take a test, you just tell them to screw off? I realize you are probably a moron, but just think it through a bit OK.
Besides, if their techs can't get a printer or a wireless network running on OS X then maybe they should seek employment elsewhere.
Two points about this. First, is of course they'll have to be able to and they will help such students. The point is trying to limit the amount of hardware and software (OS) configurations (by having a "recommended" list) makes this support much easier and much cheaper. Very simple concepts, hope I'm not losing you here. The second point is about thier "techs seeking employment elsewhere". You seem to be confused about college tech support. I can only assume you have either never been to college or at least not yet. A college will not have a large department of professional tech support personnel. They will have VERY few if any professional support. The tech support you are referring to who should "seek employment elsewhere" are students at the university (its called "work study" programs, look it up if you don't understand this term). I assume you realize a college needs students to survive right? So they cannot just go kicking them out of school because they may not be quite up to professional standards in the field of their work study program (cause trust me they aren't getting paid "professional" wages for their work).
Need more information??? How 'bout need a question! ;-)
What would the esteemed Slashdot readers think of shifting all these machines to a Linux distro (probably Ubuntu).
OK, that's the only line approaching a question in the summary (though one of these "?" thingys would make it more official). Is that seriously a front-page question? OK, the anwer is.... You ready for it? We think its good!
Thanks for asking!
Cock-sucking fuckwad. I hope the bastard burns in hell. Let him spend his fucking money there.
Wow! Just a crazy guess, but somehow I get the feeling you're a person who considers themselves a good christian aren't you?
Scary and sad, but anymore when I see comments like this my first reaction is "he must be religious". I don't mean this as an insult and I know most (or at least many) believers are nothing like this, but with all the religious nuts out there these comments just seem normal coming from the "religious".
"What would Steve Jobs say about this?"
I'm guessing something like: "If they want to use Vista, then they'll just have to upgrade all thier hardware. If they don't want to do that, they they don't get Vista."
Steve is a very "you either play by my rules or I'll take my ball and go home" type remember.
You'd think Slashdot would be full of people interested in innovation, not the other way around
For the most part people here are VERY interested in technological innovation. Problem is, "Web 2.0" is at least decade old technology. You'll find here people aren't too excited about marketing droids going on and on about faux innovation, however any real innovation is another story.
No, that doubles the cost.
:-(
Sorry, couldn't help myself
Unless they release ALL the data it's a worthless study. have dell release all server sales with and without OS. without OS will dominate nearly 2 to 1.
, 000 to 1!
2 to 1 in favor of servers without an OS huh?
Well after consulting my very own set of non-existant/made-up data I must inform you that you are not even close! According to my data servers with an OS outnumber servers without an OS by more than 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
Agreed. I hate how people always rag on Duke Nukem Forever just because its been delayed a bit! As long as it has few bugs when released whats the big deal?
While I agree this isn't going to happen, it would be interesting to know all the numbers and be able to run likely scenerios. I completely agree with you that Apple is a box maker that uses OSX to help set thier boxes apart.
;-)
However, because of OSX (which they control) they control 100% of a very small market (in relation to the entire PC market). Besides OSX forcing them into a very small market, it also obviously has some developments costs (how much would be very interesting to know).
Now if they were to give up OSX, they would cut costs and be able to enter a much larger market. If they did that, they would have two choices. 1) Cut prices (profit margins) in a bid to become a major player in the biggest market. 2) Keep profit margins and bet on the brand and quality to bring customers. Would either of those lead to more profit? Would cutting margins in exchange for a much bigger piece of a much bigger pie lead to increased value? Would positioning yourself as the "high-end" of a very large market incrase value? Now that tier boxes are really just intel PCs (more or less), it would be interesting to see them offering boxes without OSX. I know its not going to happen if for no other reason than ego, but it could be very interesting to see how well they sold and what profit they brought, for the tiny cost of offering it.
Obviously there is know way to know the answer to these questions, but interesting to consider and could leave you wondering if they couldn't possibly profit more by dropping OSX. The article would be much more interesting if it was an economics professor pondering just these questions than a pshycology prof though
Check out the MS Office EULA some time. The license forbids you from using Office to create materials critical of Microsoft
/.?
I make a habit of trying to read at least most EULAs I agree to and have read a number of different MS EULA (including Office), but have never seen this clause. Can you provide any reference on this? I've just gone back a did a re-read of my current Office EULA and unless I just read too fast and missed it, there is just nothing like that there. Is this one of those MS urban legands which gets passed around
Make no mistake, no security scheme (at least that is feasible for average use) will ever be perfectly secure. But when saying "all that does is identify the machine, not the user" you must consider "what does the current system (passwords) identify?".
The answer is nothing. Passwords are probably just about the worst security method you could imagine (besides no security at all)! They just happen to be the easiest method, so they became default.
If you spend some times actually researching InfoCard, you'll see it is at minimum a very interesting idea. Do I think it is the ultimate correct answer to security? No. However, its the most promising proposal I've seen in some time that can both provide pretty solid security and be easy enough for joe sixpack to put in wide use. Eventually, I'm sure better things will come along (or things similar to InfoCard will evolve and improve) but for the time being InfoCard is probably the best idea out there right now considering security offered, ease of use, expandibility, etc.
The point is passwords have well outlived thier usefulness in computer security and ideas like InfoCard are promising ideas which could well be the answer (at least for now).
After all, how many people would believe an Open Source company to be any less biased than MS when it comes to comparing their products?
/.user ids are getting near the 900,000 range so there are at least nearly 1 million who would believe that ;-)
Well, it looks like
Yeah, it doesn't even have really anything to do with the the summary (internet OS)! Does this count as a dupe since the "article" is just a poorly written summary of your average /. post on MS/Linux?
They may, but I'd rather pay for a service that keeps my information private. I don't need google scanning all my email (and tasks/notes/etc if they do full Exchange type stuff) to market crap to me, and I'm sure that would be best case. The other uses they may find for my data, I'd find even more offensive.
Well, first think is Eisner is out at Disney. Robert Iger is now the CEO (for about the last year I think).
I don't really understand the problem here. A bit strange thats for sure, but I'm not seeing anything to get worked up about. Michaels was under contract with ABC/ESPN/Disney but decided he wanted to go to work with his friends who moved to NBC. NBC wanted him. "They could have just as easily asked them for nothing". Sure I guess they could, but why would they? I guess if Kobe Bryant decided he wanted to play in New York, the Lakers COULD just let him go for nothing but why on Earth would they? You are giving up something of value, so you come to an aggrement on what you feel would be of equal value. Now they could have just been hard-asses and told Michaels to screw off he's staying put. However, I thought they were really cool about this and came to a very friendly settlement. Disney has been trying to get back the rights to Oswald for some time, its actually a pretty major piece fo the Disney lagecy which Iger has said he wants to bring back. So you can argue it has little monetary value, but it clearly does have value to Disney. Like Luke's light saber would have value to Lucus. One of the first things they created and started them on the road to thier empires. Olypmic highlights and rights to televise some golf must have some value (I have NO idea how much), but generally Disney (of whom I not normally a huge fan) gave Michaels and NBC what they wanted in what seems a very friendly exchange where both sides got what they wanted.
Why is that so bad?