well if you could automate it - then you could build them, program them, and let them do their work.. over time that you don't have to do it have a new basement extension carved out.. think of them less of RC toys at that point but rather automated excavation robots..
and given this site - that is what i expected... but als rather than something really awesome, we find someone with wayyyyyyyy too much time on their hands.
just fill out the form as 411XXXXXXX.. you would be surprised how few people check inputs.. 911 is what most people would do.. but that can get you in trouble as if they could show you put it intentionally then it would be abusing 911 and isn't a good idea.. but 411.. that's just information look-up.. and the local bell loves to answer questions on it.. and around here is ~1.25$ per call.
ok that is new to me - i always assumed (like you) that that was normal for polarized glasses.. although it does make since on why LCD's always looked odd and unevenly lit to me.
Obama took office starting 2009. ignoring that the 2009 budget was set in 2008. 2009 spending $3.4 Trillion and 2011 was $3.6 Trillion (just referencing the chart you pointed too). last i checked 3.6/3.4 = ~1.06 and last time i checked 6% is closer to 0 than 25%.
But (using the chart you pointed too) i'd like to point out that.. 2001 spending was $1.9 Trillion and 2008 was $3.0 Trillion.. which is 1.9/3 = ~1.58 or 58% increase during the bush years.. and i believe most of that was due to starting very very very expensive wars.
I also love how the author of that reference comes up with 28% by referencing 2008 and comparing it to 2013.. the year before and a year that hasn't happened.. while completely ignoring the other 8 years marked to the left..
we have a similar arrangement.. sots ~10$ a drive to keep the drive in RMA.. they do have the right to come on site and inspect the drive.. but you would have to have a horrid failure rate or be doing something shady for them to do that.
many studies have shown.. it is not high speed that kills but high differential speed that kills.. that person doing 15-20 mph slower than traffic is more likely to cause an accident then the person going 5 mph faster than traffic.
the only problem with Zimbra (for us) is the feature set we need requires the pro licenses where are far from free. Zimbra's licensing price is the same Per mailbox as MS is per Enterprise CAL.. except that you buy a CAL once.. Zimbra you have to pay the fee annually.. if you have a small deployment then it can be justified - but once you get to 50-100 users.. and take into account a max shell out to MS once every 3 years.. Exchange is Cheaper than Zimbra.. And if you buy a perpetual license from them (more equivalent to a CAL) then you end up paying twice the cost per user.. it very very quickly washes any savings from not having to purchase the server side.
ever forget to pay a bill? i know many large companies that do..
I'm sure they have their ducks in a row... or at least they though they did.. I do have to wonder if they didn't though - else how could Moto have gotten the successful injunction to begin with?
From what i can tell so far Apple assumed it paid the fees when it bought chips from Qualcomm (ak Qualcomm paid Moto the fees).. but that doesn't seem to be true.. Question is if the agreement between Apple and Qualcomm outlined the related fees - if it does then Apple should be able to pay the fine/rate and bill Qualcomm for the problem.. if not then Apple will be standing there realizing they for got to dot their I's and cross there T's..
I'm sure that all the answers will come out during the fight in court.. so we can all just sit back and watch and see who bet right.. i doubt this will drag on for too long.
from your post i could make some assumptions to the environment that you have seen it used.. but i don't like taking stabs into the wind.. but i will say we do not have issues like you have described and what i see other people having. mainly because we do not even attempted to use a single tool for all jobs.
Exchange's lights shine as a work group server. while yes Exchange can handle all the functions of a general MTA it isn't good at it.. Sendmail is much much better, same with filtering spam and viruses out of incoming and out going messages.. we use Sendmail SA CAV to proxy/buffer/clean all incoming mail and also to handle external delivery of messages. our exchange infrastructure does not see the outside world except for mobile devices and OWA. we get all of the benefits of exchanges work group functions and integration without most of the headaches you read about.
OWA 2010 is light years head in the right direction compared to previous OWA's.. but i think it still has a bit to go for general ease of use (not MS's fault but the tech just isn't quite there to completely blur the line between desktop and web apps). If MS continues in the same direction and at the same pace they have from 00-03-07-10, then what you have done will be an option on our side as i would expect the newest version of OWA to support some of the up coming offline web app and local data storage support. one of the main reasons we can'd do what you have done is 90% of our users travel and are constantly in and out of their mail and items while in air ports and on planes or at a client site where they have zero access to a network/net connection 90% of the time..
but the question is did they decline payment from Apple before or after they filled the injunction?
If it was during the development period prior to first sale then Moto is in the wrong. If it was after Apple started selling and "got caught" doing wrong then Moto is within their rights to refuse to license it at that point, at least until the law suite is completed.
well that was because apple was willing to only pay the fee as if they had done it from the start.. and completely ignore the fact that hey had not licensed it prior to selling products using it.
for initial negotiated fees i agree.. but for fees applied to a product made by a company that knowingly attempted to doge the fee..it isn't.
i'm not taking any side on this.. as i don't know the details.. but it only makes since that the fee applied after you are caught doing wrong be high enough to prevent you from doing it again. if it was the same cost as just licensing it to begin with then there would be zero incentive to license it ahead of time but rather you would produce and hope you didn't get caught an did then it's a know cost that you had already accounted for.
Slashdot Mirror
well if you could automate it - then you could build them, program them, and let them do their work.. over time that you don't have to do it have a new basement extension carved out.. think of them less of RC toys at that point but rather automated excavation robots..
and given this site - that is what i expected... but als rather than something really awesome, we find someone with wayyyyyyyy too much time on their hands.
USR5686E
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=USR5686E&_sacat=0&_odkw=USR5637&_osacat=0&_from=R40
http://www.usr.com/support/5686e/5686e-ug/tech-ref.html
just look for about any actual External hardware modem from the past 15 years.. (do remember you have to have the service from you local bell)
just fill out the form as 411XXXXXXX .. you would be surprised how few people check inputs.. 911 is what most people would do .. but that can get you in trouble as if they could show you put it intentionally then it would be abusing 911 and isn't a good idea.. but 411.. that's just information look-up.. and the local bell loves to answer questions on it.. and around here is ~1.25$ per call.
OpenProj is nice - the missing bit is the integration MS Project has with Project Server.
let me rephrase that.. MS Project + Project Server replacement
ok that is new to me - i always assumed (like you) that that was normal for polarized glasses.. although it does make since on why LCD's always looked odd and unevenly lit to me.
MS did buy Visio from someone else.. but they have also made alot of improvements over the years to it.
another missing open source solution is something to replace MS Project.
Obama has increased spending by 25% since he took office, the graphs are right here http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/president-obamas-spending/
basic math please..
Obama took office starting 2009. ignoring that the 2009 budget was set in 2008. 2009 spending $3.4 Trillion and 2011 was $3.6 Trillion (just referencing the chart you pointed too). last i checked 3.6/3.4 = ~1.06 and last time i checked 6% is closer to 0 than 25%.
But (using the chart you pointed too) i'd like to point out that.. 2001 spending was $1.9 Trillion and 2008 was $3.0 Trillion.. which is 1.9/3 = ~1.58 or 58% increase during the bush years.. and i believe most of that was due to starting very very very expensive wars.
I also love how the author of that reference comes up with 28% by referencing 2008 and comparing it to 2013.. the year before and a year that hasn't happened.. while completely ignoring the other 8 years marked to the left..
if you had it always following you - even in public .. i don't think it i would be an "if" but rather a "when"
now that would be an awesome project..
... tempting...
require or have option for clearance? full/part time?
seriously?? $9k for a powered hydraulic press in a box?????????????
we have a similar arrangement.. sots ~10$ a drive to keep the drive in RMA.. they do have the right to come on site and inspect the drive.. but you would have to have a horrid failure rate or be doing something shady for them to do that.
many studies have shown.. it is not high speed that kills but high differential speed that kills.. that person doing 15-20 mph slower than traffic is more likely to cause an accident then the person going 5 mph faster than traffic.
they shouldn't be able to charge you to block that "feature" from use.. i'd call them out on that..
the only problem with Zimbra (for us) is the feature set we need requires the pro licenses where are far from free. Zimbra's licensing price is the same Per mailbox as MS is per Enterprise CAL.. except that you buy a CAL once.. Zimbra you have to pay the fee annually.. if you have a small deployment then it can be justified - but once you get to 50-100 users.. and take into account a max shell out to MS once every 3 years.. Exchange is Cheaper than Zimbra.. And if you buy a perpetual license from them (more equivalent to a CAL) then you end up paying twice the cost per user.. it very very quickly washes any savings from not having to purchase the server side.
ever forget to pay a bill? i know many large companies that do..
I'm sure they have their ducks in a row... or at least they though they did.. I do have to wonder if they didn't though - else how could Moto have gotten the successful injunction to begin with?
From what i can tell so far Apple assumed it paid the fees when it bought chips from Qualcomm (ak Qualcomm paid Moto the fees).. but that doesn't seem to be true.. Question is if the agreement between Apple and Qualcomm outlined the related fees - if it does then Apple should be able to pay the fine/rate and bill Qualcomm for the problem.. if not then Apple will be standing there realizing they for got to dot their I's and cross there T's..
I'm sure that all the answers will come out during the fight in court.. so we can all just sit back and watch and see who bet right.. i doubt this will drag on for too long.
from your post i could make some assumptions to the environment that you have seen it used.. but i don't like taking stabs into the wind.. but i will say we do not have issues like you have described and what i see other people having. mainly because we do not even attempted to use a single tool for all jobs.
Exchange's lights shine as a work group server. while yes Exchange can handle all the functions of a general MTA it isn't good at it.. Sendmail is much much better, same with filtering spam and viruses out of incoming and out going messages.. we use Sendmail SA CAV to proxy/buffer/clean all incoming mail and also to handle external delivery of messages. our exchange infrastructure does not see the outside world except for mobile devices and OWA. we get all of the benefits of exchanges work group functions and integration without most of the headaches you read about.
in fact the only problem we have had in recent memory has to do with incoming message X- headers:
http://blogs.technet.com/b/exchange/archive/2009/04/06/3407221.aspx
lucky we where not adversely effected by it - but we did add it to our considerations for the next upgrade/roll-out
OWA 2010 is light years head in the right direction compared to previous OWA's.. but i think it still has a bit to go for general ease of use (not MS's fault but the tech just isn't quite there to completely blur the line between desktop and web apps). If MS continues in the same direction and at the same pace they have from 00-03-07-10, then what you have done will be an option on our side as i would expect the newest version of OWA to support some of the up coming offline web app and local data storage support. one of the main reasons we can'd do what you have done is 90% of our users travel and are constantly in and out of their mail and items while in air ports and on planes or at a client site where they have zero access to a network/net connection 90% of the time..
but the question is did they decline payment from Apple before or after they filled the injunction?
If it was during the development period prior to first sale then Moto is in the wrong. If it was after Apple started selling and "got caught" doing wrong then Moto is within their rights to refuse to license it at that point, at least until the law suite is completed.
well that was because apple was willing to only pay the fee as if they had done it from the start.. and completely ignore the fact that hey had not licensed it prior to selling products using it.
for initial negotiated fees i agree.. but for fees applied to a product made by a company that knowingly attempted to doge the fee..it isn't.
i'm not taking any side on this.. as i don't know the details.. but it only makes since that the fee applied after you are caught doing wrong be high enough to prevent you from doing it again. if it was the same cost as just licensing it to begin with then there would be zero incentive to license it ahead of time but rather you would produce and hope you didn't get caught an did then it's a know cost that you had already accounted for.
Exchange does not come with Outlook Licenses, they stopped doing that with Exchange 2007 & Outlook 2007.