I think you can also read "I am NOT upgrading to IE 7" as "I have spent so many man-hours researching/implementing hacks into my site/intranet code so that it will work with buggy IE 6 that a) I am not sure that my old code will work with the new version and b) I am not willing to spend the effort to go through all my code to remove the aforementioned hacks - if I can still remember what those hacks were or where I can find them."
I think a lot of young wannabe know-it-alls are feeling left out : )
My first gaming experience was... tennis on the Odyssey (Megavox?) console. Next of course was the Atari 2800... but those are home gaming experiences. Space Invaders, Defender, Asteroids were my first "Arcade hang-out" games... not to mention Kung-Fu and... christ the list goes on.
I have the most nostalgia for the games I used to play on my Commodore PET and C64 computers. Tank wars on the former (with letters and "textured cursors" creating the playing field) and Ultima for the latter - not to mention all the silly word games we programmed ourselves. My funniest memory was Commodore 64-generation porn : )
I wouldn't call this plan "evil". Annoying, perhaps, or even condescending (made for you ("mooo!") the consumer), but not evil. Studying the habits of technology users to better manipulate them is possibly MS's only real talent, so in a way this move is only natural.
A well-known and longstanding example of "copyright insanity" is the SNTE's claim over any picture taken of the Eiffel tower at night. When challenged, the "claim" didn't hold up in court... but as long as the claim is there, you have to legally challenge it to gain reason over it. Few can afford to do so, thus the "law" stands even today...
The utility of the software could also be its price. If a tool lightens my workload or improves the results my trade provide in any way, and earns me more money in the process, I feel inclined, even obligated, to share some of the earnings that tool generated with its inventor. I use the "donate" tool liberally, and I have even contacted someone whose website provided no means of forwarding money to ask him how I could pay him - and how much he felt "comfortable" with.
Of course with open-source projects there are many programmers - is there some sort of "central funding" scheme for such endeavours? If I like a program, hell yes I'll fund its survival/continued improvement - consider it venture capital.
Plastic fibre-optic cable is still pretty expensive though. Would love to experiment, but not on 20 metres of the stuff - it costs around €200 a spool here. Does anyone know where one can find any at a good price?
I'm so glad to read the above. I've really never understood why few seem to realise that MS's "claiming young minds" approach is practically the only reason it has its fortune today; By "young minds" I mean also the computer-unsavvy, especially first-time users.
This ~could~ be tolerable would MS have a decent product, but frankly, the thought of a company making damn certain that its unoriginal, condescending, underdeveloped, buggy, lifetime cost-and-licence-laden software is the first thing a child sees -- to better not learn anything better first -- makes me... ugh. One can't go much lower.
I find this MS-OLPC "reconciliation" move rather puzzling though. In an earlier article also mentioned here, it was Intel reps doing the MS pushing -- but now Negroponte is dealing with MS directly? I also don't understand how the same sees sense in making a normally low-cost computer more expensive with extra hardware/configuration needed for a dual boot system -- we must assume that it is MS alone funding this. Are they really that desperate to claim young minds -- desperate enough to even target the young minds of underdeveloped nations?
I was at first puzzled at MS' accepting to have its wares installed alongside Linux distros, but in comparing MS's condescending playskool interface (and 'search dog') to Ubuntu and other *nix desktops, all becomes quite clear: which do you think children will prefer? I'm sure that's why MS designed it's OS that way; this is conniving to the extreme. Rather than funding such underhanded endeavours, MS, use your billions to make a decent OS already -- it's not time that you've been lacking, you gits!
Okay, I see you, I looked up those pre-existing products - didn't before, obviously. I must add a "but" though - MS has been known for deviously naming its products before, so it is only normal to doubt their motivations - but I must admit that this article is much ado about nothing; a review of the product itself would be more interesting.
Kind of off the record, but at present I'm dealing with a "business software" company whose practices (lock-in, DRM, pricing) make MS look like saints.
I still think we can count on MS's choice of that word as an attempt to tap into the present-day "common" definition of "open" and (because of) open-source's good reputation. It is a common business tactic to try to convince a customer even through subtle means that his product has "similarities" with a better-reputed one - even if it doesn't. Words mean everything to many. If MS knows anything, it's the mindset of the potential buyer.
"Open" with "house" may have one meaning, but "Open" slapped as a "software term" has a complete other. Apples to Oranges, dear, the attempt at deception is clear. Save the sophism please!
Let me remind you that they'll be SELLING those laptops to 'partner country' governments, albeit at a nominal price.
I do have one question though - a laptop is great is a great education tool (if it is loaded with educational material), but what about web access? I would think the latter rather undissasociable from the former in an effective education-oriented program.
Wait a second - I don't understand the particularities of the intel/MS agreement (why is an Intel rep pushing MS products only in their computers? Intel can run anything), but at least from the MS perspective, they're aiming for the long-term: they're attempting to wean unsuspecting children on MS products. Once "endoctrinated" in a certain product, and the majority of other users are using the same, people are usually loathe to change... MS knows this perfectly well.
Intel's participation in this project would seem entirely against its very goals: 1) the laptops are not as cheap as other possibilities and 2) they only have their own interests at heart - not the children's, poor or not; in addition of their ability to impose "choice" on its citizens, government is a large source of quick cash for them - nothing more.
I actually don't mind paying for software - if it earns me money. Now, paying the prices that they ask of me, at the outset, even before I can afford it... that's another question.
I'm sorry, but I see fault in the context of the article - and the article is in fact based in its own comparative context. What counts most is what users need and what users use... it is only there that there is any possible base of 'comparison'. If some users need Adobe, they won't use Ubuntu... but this is not the fault of Ubuntu. This is all that I'm saying.
If one was to do an honest market study, one would determine the success of each company to reach its target base - and nothing more. All we can conclude is that a certain percentage use X OS, and a certain other uses another X... but what software figure in those conclusions is only secondary - to the platform itself. If Adobe won't support Ubutntu, and Ubuntu fails because of this, it is not because Ubuntu is a lesser OS.
Perhaps I'm complaining about the/. choice of title more than anything.
I have to agree with you, because for anyone that has enough time to do the research, one could discover that he could profit from lower/just-as-good quality hardware (normally destined for platforms such as those MS has to offer) that can handle a totally free OS that functions just as well as Apple's.... the only thing lacking is support by the leading and most tried/used software developers... Adobe and the like. Of course there's alternative, but sorry dearie: most of my clients read.psd.
This is not a level playing table for sure. Yet wouldn't it be in the interest of Adobe to develop for "free" OS's as well? If paying for photoshop and X's OS is too much for me, if X OS is free, perhaps I can afford just Photoshop. Or at least the LE version if it's available.
If there's one thing I dislike, it's "comparative" studies - inconclusive, all of them. Do you prefer one over the other? Perhaps. Is one "better" than the other? Not if they're each in their own league.
This is mainly why I dislike the title "is apple 'killing' Linux on the desktop". If anything, Linux is GAINING ground on apple in recent years - thanks to distros such as Gnome and Ubuntu - so why the hyperactive titles? One would think/. too intelligent to fall for such techno-queeny cruft.
But don't fall into a "definition of terms" - what is "pirate", exactly, and to who? Per the record/movie companies, that would be even, in a "backup" method mentioned in an earlier post, stripping the DRM from the content and burniing it to a DVD. This is not piracy; it is the equivilent of stripping the store's magnetised security strip off a CD after I buy it.
Because of its often ineffective (and unthought) application, much of DRM is the equivilent of a movement-limiting GSM ankle bracelet. iTunes has got it about right, but even then I think the restrictions are off the mark - it's the media that has to adapt to the new technology, not the other way around. Start by defining what "Piracy" is... IMHO that definition should only apply to files over a certain quality. But this story is about that - legally purchased high-quality!
I'll be the plaintiffs are hoping that the judge and jury are even more retarded... you never know. The layman-unintelligible buzzwords and jargon will abound, I'm sure.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you can also read "I am NOT upgrading to IE 7" as "I have spent so many man-hours researching/implementing hacks into my site/intranet code so that it will work with buggy IE 6 that a) I am not sure that my old code will work with the new version and b) I am not willing to spend the effort to go through all my code to remove the aforementioned hacks - if I can still remember what those hacks were or where I can find them."
I think a lot of young wannabe know-it-alls are feeling left out : )
My first gaming experience was... tennis on the Odyssey (Megavox?) console. Next of course was the Atari 2800... but those are home gaming experiences. Space Invaders, Defender, Asteroids were my first "Arcade hang-out" games... not to mention Kung-Fu and... christ the list goes on.
I have the most nostalgia for the games I used to play on my Commodore PET and C64 computers. Tank wars on the former (with letters and "textured cursors" creating the playing field) and Ultima for the latter - not to mention all the silly word games we programmed ourselves. My funniest memory was Commodore 64-generation porn : )
I wouldn't call this plan "evil". Annoying, perhaps, or even condescending (made for you ("mooo!") the consumer), but not evil. Studying the habits of technology users to better manipulate them is possibly MS's only real talent, so in a way this move is only natural.
A well-known and longstanding example of "copyright insanity" is the SNTE's claim over any picture taken of the Eiffel tower at night. When challenged, the "claim" didn't hold up in court... but as long as the claim is there, you have to legally challenge it to gain reason over it. Few can afford to do so, thus the "law" stands even today...
The utility of the software could also be its price. If a tool lightens my workload or improves the results my trade provide in any way, and earns me more money in the process, I feel inclined, even obligated, to share some of the earnings that tool generated with its inventor. I use the "donate" tool liberally, and I have even contacted someone whose website provided no means of forwarding money to ask him how I could pay him - and how much he felt "comfortable" with.
Of course with open-source projects there are many programmers - is there some sort of "central funding" scheme for such endeavours? If I like a program, hell yes I'll fund its survival/continued improvement - consider it venture capital.
WTF??? Sorry, wrong thread!
Happy to see the Linux desktop gaining ground, anyhow.
One day we won't need Negroponte's OLOC plan? This looks like the next level up, anyhow.
Plastic fibre-optic cable is still pretty expensive though. Would love to experiment, but not on 20 metres of the stuff - it costs around €200 a spool here. Does anyone know where one can find any at a good price?
I'm so glad to read the above. I've really never understood why few seem to realise that MS's "claiming young minds" approach is practically the only reason it has its fortune today; By "young minds" I mean also the computer-unsavvy, especially first-time users.
This ~could~ be tolerable would MS have a decent product, but frankly, the thought of a company making damn certain that its unoriginal, condescending, underdeveloped, buggy, lifetime cost-and-licence-laden software is the first thing a child sees -- to better not learn anything better first -- makes me... ugh. One can't go much lower.
I find this MS-OLPC "reconciliation" move rather puzzling though. In an earlier article also mentioned here, it was Intel reps doing the MS pushing -- but now Negroponte is dealing with MS directly? I also don't understand how the same sees sense in making a normally low-cost computer more expensive with extra hardware/configuration needed for a dual boot system -- we must assume that it is MS alone funding this. Are they really that desperate to claim young minds -- desperate enough to even target the young minds of underdeveloped nations?
I was at first puzzled at MS' accepting to have its wares installed alongside Linux distros, but in comparing MS's condescending playskool interface (and 'search dog') to Ubuntu and other *nix desktops, all becomes quite clear: which do you think children will prefer? I'm sure that's why MS designed it's OS that way; this is conniving to the extreme. Rather than funding such underhanded endeavours, MS, use your billions to make a decent OS already -- it's not time that you've been lacking, you gits!
Okay, I see you, I looked up those pre-existing products - didn't before, obviously. I must add a "but" though - MS has been known for deviously naming its products before, so it is only normal to doubt their motivations - but I must admit that this article is much ado about nothing; a review of the product itself would be more interesting.
Kind of off the record, but at present I'm dealing with a "business software" company whose practices (lock-in, DRM, pricing) make MS look like saints.
Well, then, here's hoping you give them lots of money!
I still think we can count on MS's choice of that word as an attempt to tap into the present-day "common" definition of "open" and (because of) open-source's good reputation. It is a common business tactic to try to convince a customer even through subtle means that his product has "similarities" with a better-reputed one - even if it doesn't. Words mean everything to many. If MS knows anything, it's the mindset of the potential buyer.
*Cough*
"Open" with "house" may have one meaning, but "Open" slapped as a "software term" has a complete other. Apples to Oranges, dear, the attempt at deception is clear. Save the sophism please!
Let me remind you that they'll be SELLING those laptops to 'partner country' governments, albeit at a nominal price.
I do have one question though - a laptop is great is a great education tool (if it is loaded with educational material), but what about web access? I would think the latter rather undissasociable from the former in an effective education-oriented program.
Wait a second - I don't understand the particularities of the intel/MS agreement (why is an Intel rep pushing MS products only in their computers? Intel can run anything), but at least from the MS perspective, they're aiming for the long-term: they're attempting to wean unsuspecting children on MS products. Once "endoctrinated" in a certain product, and the majority of other users are using the same, people are usually loathe to change... MS knows this perfectly well.
Intel's participation in this project would seem entirely against its very goals: 1) the laptops are not as cheap as other possibilities and 2) they only have their own interests at heart - not the children's, poor or not; in addition of their ability to impose "choice" on its citizens, government is a large source of quick cash for them - nothing more.
Depends on which computer is running Vista; that one's the WC. Still takes a long time to transfer "data", as it has the world's slowest flush.
Monopolist? How?
I actually don't mind paying for software - if it earns me money. Now, paying the prices that they ask of me, at the outset, even before I can afford it... that's another question.
I'm sorry, but I see fault in the context of the article - and the article is in fact based in its own comparative context. What counts most is what users need and what users use... it is only there that there is any possible base of 'comparison'. If some users need Adobe, they won't use Ubuntu... but this is not the fault of Ubuntu. This is all that I'm saying.
/. choice of title more than anything.
If one was to do an honest market study, one would determine the success of each company to reach its target base - and nothing more. All we can conclude is that a certain percentage use X OS, and a certain other uses another X... but what software figure in those conclusions is only secondary - to the platform itself. If Adobe won't support Ubutntu, and Ubuntu fails because of this, it is not because Ubuntu is a lesser OS.
Perhaps I'm complaining about the
I have to agree with you, because for anyone that has enough time to do the research, one could discover that he could profit from lower/just-as-good quality hardware (normally destined for platforms such as those MS has to offer) that can handle a totally free OS that functions just as well as Apple's.... the only thing lacking is support by the leading and most tried/used software developers... Adobe and the like. Of course there's alternative, but sorry dearie: most of my clients read .psd.
This is not a level playing table for sure. Yet wouldn't it be in the interest of Adobe to develop for "free" OS's as well? If paying for photoshop and X's OS is too much for me, if X OS is free, perhaps I can afford just Photoshop. Or at least the LE version if it's available.
If there's one thing I dislike, it's "comparative" studies - inconclusive, all of them. Do you prefer one over the other? Perhaps. Is one "better" than the other? Not if they're each in their own league.
/. too intelligent to fall for such techno-queeny cruft.
This is mainly why I dislike the title "is apple 'killing' Linux on the desktop". If anything, Linux is GAINING ground on apple in recent years - thanks to distros such as Gnome and Ubuntu - so why the hyperactive titles? One would think
But don't fall into a "definition of terms" - what is "pirate", exactly, and to who? Per the record/movie companies, that would be even, in a "backup" method mentioned in an earlier post, stripping the DRM from the content and burniing it to a DVD. This is not piracy; it is the equivilent of stripping the store's magnetised security strip off a CD after I buy it.
... IMHO that definition should only apply to files over a certain quality. But this story is about that - legally purchased high-quality!
Because of its often ineffective (and unthought) application, much of DRM is the equivilent of a movement-limiting GSM ankle bracelet. iTunes has got it about right, but even then I think the restrictions are off the mark - it's the media that has to adapt to the new technology, not the other way around. Start by defining what "Piracy" is
I'll be the plaintiffs are hoping that the judge and jury are even more retarded... you never know. The layman-unintelligible buzzwords and jargon will abound, I'm sure.
Thank you!
Maybe if you weren't an anonymous coward, you wouldn't be a nihilist.