I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying that's the reason. If a manufacturer makes a product that will, by default or with basic setup, share out all the user's media you can bet someone will share stuff they shouldn't. If they get in trouble, you can bet they'll point at WD. WD doesn't want that. Welcome to America - how long have you been here, exactly, if you don't know how things work?
Again, you all don't understand. I'm not saying this is a good thing or that it's not stupid, it's simply the way it is. If all a user has to do is plug in a hard drive and use it as intended and it will share out their media, the user is liable. Then Joe Dumbass can claim that he didn't know and that the way the product works led him to break the law, and either he or the media companies will then sue WD. I'm not saying this is a good state of affairs, I'm saying these are the facts of our society. I'm not sure why you all can't grasp this. It's the same reason we have DRM for portable media players so you can't get the media off.
As for sharing home videos or recorded MP3's, tough crap. There's no way for them to tell the difference, so they took the CYA approach.
Speak for yourself. Linux is great for some stuff, but the thought of giving up.NET/VS2005 for developing Enterprise Applications and using Linux makes me want to poke myself in the eye with something hot. Hot and sharp. And I've developed lots of UNIX code in a variety of languages.
The funniest thing about you Linux/FOSS dweebs is you have no idea what's going on on the other side of the fence, but you're just _convinced_ your little Perl, Ruby/Rails, PHP, or whatever the "hot" stuff is in FOSS is super-high-tech and Windows people are developing apps in VBA or something. It's hilarious.
For those of you who can't read the updates. WD restricts access to media (in a half-assed way) when shared, essentially, "to the public". In fact they probably have to do this. Joe user dumps his MP3's on the disk, connects it to the net, then later wants Jane to have access to some other files. Oops, Mp3's shared - Joe has illegally shared copyrighted material. Both record companies and Joe can sue WD.
So nothing evil here, outside of the fact that WD probably has to do this to CTA (cover their asses).
What's wrong with eugenics? Some people shouldn't have children. Our prisons are choked with them, and our social system is choked with them. The multiple children they abuse and neglect will then go on to follow in their footsteps.
A mother can have a child, have it raped and beaten by the father and taken away. Nobody will go to prison in this most of the time because children make lousy witnesses. Said mother can have another child, which she exposed to heroin and meth. Said child can be abused and neglected, taken away. Now, said mother can pop out 3 more kids and abuse/neglect them and they can all be taken away.
Said mother will have spent 0 prison time. Said mother can have more kids. Children of said mother will probably go on to do the same thing. These facts will be the downfall of civilization in 100 years when we have a population of 8 billion poor, abused, abusive scum and a population of 2 billion decent people in the world.
Of course, an easy solution is to make child neglect or abuse a very serious crime and offer the scum a choice of either sterilization or prison, but our society only pays lip service to caring about children, they don't actually.
More accurately, Vista _isn't_ universally known for being terrible if your universe includes only Microsoft. What exactly are you basing this on, just your own narrow experience? In fact, Vista is only a failure if you compare it to previous MS OS's. It's quite a decent OS, though far from perfect. People whined about XP too, and it's turned out to be quite stable and successful.
Now, to answer your question regarding people seemingly not moving to Linux... that's the whole point. Competition doesn't exist or is somehow being stifled in the OS market. If they were on a level playing ground, Linux, being free and having the other technical advantages you yourself listed, would have a much stronger place in the market than it has today. Did you seriously just use that argument? For real? That's seriously a... special argument. Think "special olympics" not "special diamond". Your argument is that since Linux isn't doing well, Microsoft must be playing dirty. That's the _one_ possible explanation? Give me an f'ing break. Linux isn't doing well on the desktop because it sucks ass as a desktop OS. Linux is doing well on the server because it kicks ass as a server OS. So if Microsoft is playing dirty, why is Linux so successful everywhere but the desktop? I know.. because MS only plays dirty in the desktop, or they pay people off, or whatever dreb you all make up.
And you have evidence that Microsoft is in any way illegally influencing said resellers? I didn't think so. In the end, 95% of end-users want MS OS's, so that's what they sell.
So we've further narrowed what constitutes a monopoly. Apparently now it's about what "joe average" consumer can get by just walking his lazy ass into a CompUSA or Wal-Mart. I see... that makes sense.
Two problems. First, Vista is only "universally" known for being terrible if your Universe extends to (and only to) the borders of SlashDot. Vista is not terrible, in fact it works quite well. It's not perfect, no. And you still haven't explained why if Vista is so horrible people haven't moved to Linux, which is free. Does MS have some kind of magic, evil super-power that prevents people from using an OS that is literally without cost?
Second - The Xbox 360 is doing just fine. So I'm not sure what your point was with that whole tangent.
Oh. You mean it's not just that people want to use MS products, it's that Microsoft _must_ be doing something illegal. I see. What a...powerful and persuasive argument. So if I invent something, and then all kinds of other people write something very similar and people still overwhelmingly choose my product, I have a monopoly. Unfortunately, that is nonsensical and irrational.
This makes about as much sense as idiots who claim Apple has a "monopoly" on the Ipod. It's just stupid on every level. A monopoly should be determined by availability of similar functionality and by pricing power. Plenty of desktop OS's, and Microsoft can't control their price.
That's because those were real monopolies. You can't have a monopoly that's a) based on intellectual property and not a physically limited or controlled resource and b) has no pricing power over the market they're in (Linux is free, duh). So they're nothing like those other companies not because they're amateurs, but because they're not even a monopoly and never were.
Linux is free, no? Linux is easy to install, per every Penguin T-shirt wearing promoter's repeated claims. Linux is more open. Linux has all the office, email, and web applications most people need. Linux is more stable. Linux is more secure. Linux is better in almost every way, they tell us.
How, exactly, is Linux not a valid alternative? That leaves aside Apple, which is yet another strong alternative. And of course it leaves aside the dozens of other obscure-ish UNIX-like and non-UNIX alternative OS's people can use. And Microsoft has no pricing power over these other OS's, to boot. So it really dumbfounds and amuses me at the same time when people can sit with a straight face and claim Microsoft is some evil Monopoly.
If I post it on a forum somewhere of my own free will (which I have done sometimes), you are certainly welcome to it. It's kind of like how if I put out a non-working dishwasher in front of my house like trash and someone takes it, I'm not too bloody likely to be successful in prosecuting them for theft.
Huh? In high school, there is an expectation that I do my own work so I can learn the material. In "real life", it's kind of stupid to be all high minded and waste a bunch of time on some little task if someone's already done the work. Legally, I wouldn't give a shit in this instance because the author won't ever know and it would be a 1:1,000,000,000 shot that he could/would sue. Ethically, using the code causes no one harm. Ergo, just use the damn code and shut up about it.
It's kind of sad and silly you're stuck in 1987. x86 has won the uarch wars, and it's making its way into everything. First, Silverthorn will have superior performance compared to e.g. ARM - period. Second, it will have comparable power use. Finally, people know how to develop for x86, and the tools know how to target x86 easily. You're going to "sadly" see it trickle down to smaller and smaller devices, but nobody but people stuck in 1987 who still where "CISC sucks" t-shirts will be sad about it.
Wow, you sure do like to make stuff up. Maybe your incoherant, irrational posting style _and_ content are the reason you have such a pitifully low karma. Said low karma basically means nobody gives a shit about your worthless thoughts as embodied in your ridiculous posts.
Yeah, because Microsoft doesn't know what they're talking about. This is a PRNG flaw, it doesn't help you "get credentials" in terms of getting Windows logins/passwords. For Christ's sake. Once you have access to the machine, you can theoretically access any encrypted data on the machine because you can get the session keys for e.g. SSL sessions. But, of course, since you already have admin access you could do this any of various other ways anyway.
Why? You think someone can just easily pull up a diesel tractor and haul it away? They have security on these things, nobody's going to steal it. As for data, it's probably attractive to make these containers diskless. Disks fail fairly often and need more cooling. If you network boot and use e.g. iscsi you can run the trailer hotter and not have as many hardware failures.
You don't put them at sea. You put them somewhere where you have network and power, probably attached to an existing data center. You plug it in, and run e.g. 100Gig network to the container. This isn't rocket surgery. If one of the blades goes bad, you walk in, pull it out, and slide in a new blade. Not exactly difficult.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying that's the reason. If a manufacturer makes a product that will, by default or with basic setup, share out all the user's media you can bet someone will share stuff they shouldn't. If they get in trouble, you can bet they'll point at WD. WD doesn't want that. Welcome to America - how long have you been here, exactly, if you don't know how things work?
Again, you all don't understand. I'm not saying this is a good thing or that it's not stupid, it's simply the way it is. If all a user has to do is plug in a hard drive and use it as intended and it will share out their media, the user is liable. Then Joe Dumbass can claim that he didn't know and that the way the product works led him to break the law, and either he or the media companies will then sue WD. I'm not saying this is a good state of affairs, I'm saying these are the facts of our society. I'm not sure why you all can't grasp this. It's the same reason we have DRM for portable media players so you can't get the media off.
As for sharing home videos or recorded MP3's, tough crap. There's no way for them to tell the difference, so they took the CYA approach.
Speak for yourself. Linux is great for some stuff, but the thought of giving up .NET/VS2005 for developing Enterprise Applications and using Linux makes me want to poke myself in the eye with something hot. Hot and sharp. And I've developed lots of UNIX code in a variety of languages.
The funniest thing about you Linux/FOSS dweebs is you have no idea what's going on on the other side of the fence, but you're just _convinced_ your little Perl, Ruby/Rails, PHP, or whatever the "hot" stuff is in FOSS is super-high-tech and Windows people are developing apps in VBA or something. It's hilarious.
For those of you who can't read the updates. WD restricts access to media (in a half-assed way) when shared, essentially, "to the public". In fact they probably have to do this. Joe user dumps his MP3's on the disk, connects it to the net, then later wants Jane to have access to some other files. Oops, Mp3's shared - Joe has illegally shared copyrighted material. Both record companies and Joe can sue WD.
So nothing evil here, outside of the fact that WD probably has to do this to CTA (cover their asses).
What's wrong with eugenics? Some people shouldn't have children. Our prisons are choked with them, and our social system is choked with them. The multiple children they abuse and neglect will then go on to follow in their footsteps. A mother can have a child, have it raped and beaten by the father and taken away. Nobody will go to prison in this most of the time because children make lousy witnesses. Said mother can have another child, which she exposed to heroin and meth. Said child can be abused and neglected, taken away. Now, said mother can pop out 3 more kids and abuse/neglect them and they can all be taken away. Said mother will have spent 0 prison time. Said mother can have more kids. Children of said mother will probably go on to do the same thing. These facts will be the downfall of civilization in 100 years when we have a population of 8 billion poor, abused, abusive scum and a population of 2 billion decent people in the world. Of course, an easy solution is to make child neglect or abuse a very serious crime and offer the scum a choice of either sterilization or prison, but our society only pays lip service to caring about children, they don't actually.
Interesting - I assume you have some sort of basis for claiming they are selling below cost?
And you have evidence that Microsoft is in any way illegally influencing said resellers? I didn't think so. In the end, 95% of end-users want MS OS's, so that's what they sell.
So we've further narrowed what constitutes a monopoly. Apparently now it's about what "joe average" consumer can get by just walking his lazy ass into a CompUSA or Wal-Mart. I see... that makes sense.
Second - The Xbox 360 is doing just fine. So I'm not sure what your point was with that whole tangent.
This makes about as much sense as idiots who claim Apple has a "monopoly" on the Ipod. It's just stupid on every level. A monopoly should be determined by availability of similar functionality and by pricing power. Plenty of desktop OS's, and Microsoft can't control their price.
First, they're not a "convicted monopolist". How that phrase annoys me. Second, what should the US do? Microsoft isn't breaking any laws.
That's because those were real monopolies. You can't have a monopoly that's a) based on intellectual property and not a physically limited or controlled resource and b) has no pricing power over the market they're in (Linux is free, duh). So they're nothing like those other companies not because they're amateurs, but because they're not even a monopoly and never were.
How, exactly, is Linux not a valid alternative? That leaves aside Apple, which is yet another strong alternative. And of course it leaves aside the dozens of other obscure-ish UNIX-like and non-UNIX alternative OS's people can use. And Microsoft has no pricing power over these other OS's, to boot. So it really dumbfounds and amuses me at the same time when people can sit with a straight face and claim Microsoft is some evil Monopoly.
If I post it on a forum somewhere of my own free will (which I have done sometimes), you are certainly welcome to it. It's kind of like how if I put out a non-working dishwasher in front of my house like trash and someone takes it, I'm not too bloody likely to be successful in prosecuting them for theft.
Huh? In high school, there is an expectation that I do my own work so I can learn the material. In "real life", it's kind of stupid to be all high minded and waste a bunch of time on some little task if someone's already done the work. Legally, I wouldn't give a shit in this instance because the author won't ever know and it would be a 1:1,000,000,000 shot that he could/would sue. Ethically, using the code causes no one harm. Ergo, just use the damn code and shut up about it.
God quit being so boring. You're boring me. Seriously, I've pooped more interesting things.
Roger that - I'll quit. May I also commend you on your excellent and rational rebuttal. You, sir, have a finely honed mind.
It's kind of sad and silly you're stuck in 1987. x86 has won the uarch wars, and it's making its way into everything. First, Silverthorn will have superior performance compared to e.g. ARM - period. Second, it will have comparable power use. Finally, people know how to develop for x86, and the tools know how to target x86 easily. You're going to "sadly" see it trickle down to smaller and smaller devices, but nobody but people stuck in 1987 who still where "CISC sucks" t-shirts will be sad about it.
Wow, you sure do like to make stuff up. Maybe your incoherant, irrational posting style _and_ content are the reason you have such a pitifully low karma. Said low karma basically means nobody gives a shit about your worthless thoughts as embodied in your ridiculous posts.
Give me a break. Do you think any company involved in this is doing it for non-profit reasons? You're sadly deluded.
Sorry, #2 is simply a lie. I assume, though, that since you said it you have evidence that _anyone_ is selling at a loss? I thought not.
Yeah, because Microsoft doesn't know what they're talking about. This is a PRNG flaw, it doesn't help you "get credentials" in terms of getting Windows logins/passwords. For Christ's sake. Once you have access to the machine, you can theoretically access any encrypted data on the machine because you can get the session keys for e.g. SSL sessions. But, of course, since you already have admin access you could do this any of various other ways anyway.
Why? You think someone can just easily pull up a diesel tractor and haul it away? They have security on these things, nobody's going to steal it. As for data, it's probably attractive to make these containers diskless. Disks fail fairly often and need more cooling. If you network boot and use e.g. iscsi you can run the trailer hotter and not have as many hardware failures.
You don't put them at sea. You put them somewhere where you have network and power, probably attached to an existing data center. You plug it in, and run e.g. 100Gig network to the container. This isn't rocket surgery. If one of the blades goes bad, you walk in, pull it out, and slide in a new blade. Not exactly difficult.