FTA: "Blu-ray is backed by Sony Corp., Apple Computer Inc., Hewlett-Packard Co. and Dell Inc., along with a variety of other tech companies and studios."
I didn't know apple supports the blu-ray. And now I feel compelled to support it irrationally until apple backs the next hopefully big thing.
I was surprised to read that China is developing a standard with anti-piracy in mind... Since most of my favourite hardware toys come from there (the kind you can't buy in North American stores)...
damn straight... developing for windows is painful simply because it's all over the place... Registry, WMI (with it's piece of shit WQL interface that shows why SQL-like databases should never touch something object oriented), ATL/COM, etc.
Don't even get me started on porting to disimilar windows os' (like from xp to ce)... It's a nightmare to say the least.
Not to mention that the hardware developers sometimes don't play by ms' standards either, making it really difficult in some cases. (even though that isn't ms' fault, but it is their problem)
so say that windows is well integrated is like saying that pant legs are integrated. Yes, it true at the upper levels, but there is a division at some point.
"Microsoft not getting credit on Slashdot?! Never:)"
Exactly, we give them credit for being swindling, baby eaters of humanity's destruction who retard innovation and compatibility for the sake of monitary gain all the time.
If microsoft was split we'd have an oligopoly rather than a monopoly.
And because the office side of the company wouldn't be legally linked to the OS side they wouldn't have to do things like port it to apple to not get in trouble. So apple would lose office support and things would be worse.
When people are starting to be concerned about the security of their browsers doesn't a browser with a lot of options that have a default of on seem like a bad idea? Especially when they may or may not be used. (many people still don't fully use tabbing when given the option)
Firefox's extentions seem like the smart way to go all around.
somewhere steve jobs is smiling. You would think that due to recent developments that the music industry would love to emanate a "play by our rules or we'll go somewhere else" image.
Well, that is unless microsoft took advantage of that situation and dictated terrible terms, with the message that like it or not, a new distributor is in town.
That's the problem with admitting you are currently in a bad deal while negotiating for another. They come across, on some levels as appearing desperate.
What would it do to iPod sales if microsoft became the leader in music distribution software? Considering the iPod is a cash cow for apple, and microsoft would have to support the iPod to enter the market, would the two of them have to play nice? (I recall reading a theory that apple was hoping to break even on the iTunes music store, if so, then what would the fallout for an MS/music industry from apple's perspective?)
The FUD detector went off due to the comments about innovation and progress. Because it boils down to "companies won't do anything if they fear lawsuits." Which, in a world that demands more and more, is not a good argument. Hardly a/. knee-jerk reaction, just a reaction to bullshit in general.
I say it's bullshit because of your line of thought illustrated in your manager example. If I sell a package v 1.0 and promise features X, Y, and Z only to discover that feature Z has a slight bug in implementation. Do I release a new for-profit "package" only to fix the feature that I promised (and therefore sold under a contract if feature Z was promoted) in v 1.0 called v 1.1, or do I release patches for free? (Granted, this was 1992 and that would have made a free release more difficult. But $10 for a disk + shipping + labelling for the equivilant of a patch sounds a little steep)
The later option sounds a lot more lawsuit proof to me. This means that you can focus releases on new features, rather than patching bugs which also sounds more agile. That seems to be microsoft's strategy today. Is it still open to lawsuits? yes. Is it open to a lawsuit of the nature in this case (where people don't want to pay for something they have already bought)? No. The only other type of possible lawsuit from the angle of bugs is one where damage is done due to negligence on microsoft's part. But that wasn't what this case was about (they were specific on the cost of "upgrading" due to such a bug, not the bug itself).
You had me agreeing completely with you up until "I think that had the decision gone the other way, you'd see much less innovation and progress from software companies, in general." At that point my FUD detector went off.
Progress can be taken to mean many things. I consider progress from microsoft to be that I'm not afraid of the system crashing when I'm doing something import. And 2000/XP is progress on that front. In more abstract terms, I consider progress to be writing software that gives the desired result at all times.
As for innovation, while I do consider it a good thing, it admittingly can come at a price of stability (in all programs, take the linux kernel's unstable builds as an example). And given my desire for correctness, I would rather programs that just do what I want, rather than do something that everyone wants (best tool for the job). An example of this would be turning services on (in any operating system) by default, that the average user will not use. Of course, the obvious other point one could make is when both Netscape and IE were in a feature race, where those features were highly unstable at times. And finally, if innovation is rushed, it can create terrible standards, that need backwards compatibility.
I would like to point out that innovation isn't as lacking as one may believe. Given that the best programmers I've both met and heard of seem to like to push the boundaries of what the machines can do. The only strain on this quality is resources.
Java's been a huge investment for Sun. Yet, not as profitable as they would like (considering it's ubiquity). Assuming that this client uses ads, and Java (it would make sence). They may finally earn a little back at the cost of the time taken to build the new office suite.
That being said, that wouldn't be the best strategy available from a monitary perspective. In this case, java would be considered a sunk cost. And I can't see any PHB's, even at sun, thinking otherwise.
So, the strategy is probably focused on promoting Operating System agnostism. And, if sun is lucky, get attention and prove (to the average person, not programmers and admins) that they are relevant. Hence, the potential for long term gain. In this case, breaking even on the investment is well worth it.
I don't think this is a game that Microsoft wants to play because no matter what the outcome they have to lose, with the exceptional case of this not catching on. But if google promotes it, at the very least, free office software should get attention no matter what.
This is just my 2 cents, but with exchange rates I think it only amounts to 1.
If you have WPA available to both machines, why are you using WEP?
Other than that, I want to know how the editors let a windows tech support question on a *nix biased board. Hell, even if it was, "I can't get iwconfig to work properly, and I think it's the way I've used ndiswrapper, are there any other open source tools or drivers available?" I still don't think it should have been accepted.
Next up on slashdot from the why-the-fuck dept. "How do I put IE on linux using WINE?"
How well does investing in a product that is already popular work?
I ask this, because let's assume it is good advice. Then the tactic works, more VCs will be looking for "opportunity" (I use quotations because if the product is popular meaning many eyes can and are looking at it, then that opportunity will be exploited to any means necessary, until there is nothing left to exploit, meaning not much opportunity) which will limit the gains of the sector. At least that is what my rudimentary knowledge of economics is telling me.
Kinda sounds like the.com bubble... 1) Get users 2) ??? (see FREELOADING. in the article) 3) Profit!
And if it doesn't work, then move along nothing to see here.
I think you just entered the "theory is more important than langauge" argument.
To which I agree with you. Hence my favourtism for computer science over a college course (Note: I use the Canadian version of the term college). But that is more about the quality of work rather than quantity (which is one of those reasons that keeping the "status quo" of the computing world scares me).
I suppose I should have stated it from a different prespective and emphasized the "solution of the times" aspect... Where the better solution gains wide acceptance and is entrenched... And it's easier to change people than change technology...
"Militarily, just imagine if the military minds of Julius Caesar, Alexander and Cromwell held commanded in today's battlefields."
Code-wise, picture if the old COBOL programmers today were kept in the workforce for another dozen decades. I think it's a shame that a langauge as old as my father is still being used by my father at his age. Likewise, if I'm using C++ when I'm nearing 50.
Old -> legacy -> entrenchment... The only escape is when cost(refractoring_to_new) cost(maintaining_old)... Which is starting to happen in the case of COBOL due to the aging of that generation...
Not to say that old things are bad, it's just that they typically were solutions for their day. Picture this, one day (probably within our lifetimes), people might look at Java as an efficient language. It sounds kinda funny to us. But go back 30 years and tell an assembly programmer that C is efficient.
I never got the point of those piracy ads... I'm already in the fucking theatre, paying for the movie! What are they hoping that the cam producers have an 11th hour realization that "capturing movies and distributing them in poor quality is bad"?
"If he fails, these crooks will never be stopped."
What ever happened to the various Mafias? I know, they're old school criminals. And I know that they aren't as good in the courts as the RIAA. But I do know that they get the job done.
All I'm saying is that we should give the RIAA a taste of intimidation, it's been their modus operandi for some time now, and payback's a bitch.
The conservatives (~100 seats) and liberals will probably go for it, the ndp will be against it (I believe they hold 19 seats, and would be needed if the liberals didn't have any other support), and god only knows what the bloc will do (52 seats, I believe...).
Slashdot Mirror
FTA: "Blu-ray is backed by Sony Corp., Apple Computer Inc., Hewlett-Packard Co. and Dell Inc., along with a variety of other tech companies and studios."
I didn't know apple supports the blu-ray. And now I feel compelled to support it irrationally until apple backs the next hopefully big thing.
I was surprised to read that China is developing a standard with anti-piracy in mind... Since most of my favourite hardware toys come from there (the kind you can't buy in North American stores)...
"sounds like a kid banging on pots in the kitchen".
That particular query will return all the emo-poser bands making loud disimilar sounds to make money and stroke their egos.
Great, more microsoft software that people can exploit.
(of course, I am making assumptions based on the premise that it will be connected to the 'net for updates)
damn straight... developing for windows is painful simply because it's all over the place... Registry, WMI (with it's piece of shit WQL interface that shows why SQL-like databases should never touch something object oriented), ATL/COM, etc.
Don't even get me started on porting to disimilar windows os' (like from xp to ce)... It's a nightmare to say the least.
Not to mention that the hardware developers sometimes don't play by ms' standards either, making it really difficult in some cases. (even though that isn't ms' fault, but it is their problem)
so say that windows is well integrated is like saying that pant legs are integrated. Yes, it true at the upper levels, but there is a division at some point.
*gets back to porting VC++ code*
"Microsoft not getting credit on Slashdot?! Never :)"
Exactly, we give them credit for being swindling, baby eaters of humanity's destruction who retard innovation and compatibility for the sake of monitary gain all the time.
And because the office side of the company wouldn't be legally linked to the OS side they wouldn't have to do things like port it to apple to not get in trouble. So apple would lose office support and things would be worse.
In soviet russia, internet controls you!
When people are starting to be concerned about the security of their browsers doesn't a browser with a lot of options that have a default of on seem like a bad idea? Especially when they may or may not be used. (many people still don't fully use tabbing when given the option)
Firefox's extentions seem like the smart way to go all around.
Why wouldn't you want to insult the police, it's not like they can do anything to you.
This article is a little misleading, the word approved has a hidden meaning in it.
Like most outlets, I will bet that this site will focus mainly on windows. It just that this time, the attention is deserved.
I almost laughed out loud in a lecture thanks to that line...
"A players hire A players, B players hire C players"
Then how do you get B players?
somewhere steve jobs is smiling. You would think that due to recent developments that the music industry would love to emanate a "play by our rules or we'll go somewhere else" image.
Well, that is unless microsoft took advantage of that situation and dictated terrible terms, with the message that like it or not, a new distributor is in town.
That's the problem with admitting you are currently in a bad deal while negotiating for another. They come across, on some levels as appearing desperate.
What would it do to iPod sales if microsoft became the leader in music distribution software? Considering the iPod is a cash cow for apple, and microsoft would have to support the iPod to enter the market, would the two of them have to play nice? (I recall reading a theory that apple was hoping to break even on the iTunes music store, if so, then what would the fallout for an MS/music industry from apple's perspective?)
The FUD detector went off due to the comments about innovation and progress. Because it boils down to "companies won't do anything if they fear lawsuits." Which, in a world that demands more and more, is not a good argument. Hardly a /. knee-jerk reaction, just a reaction to bullshit in general.
I say it's bullshit because of your line of thought illustrated in your manager example. If I sell a package v 1.0 and promise features X, Y, and Z only to discover that feature Z has a slight bug in implementation. Do I release a new for-profit "package" only to fix the feature that I promised (and therefore sold under a contract if feature Z was promoted) in v 1.0 called v 1.1, or do I release patches for free? (Granted, this was 1992 and that would have made a free release more difficult. But $10 for a disk + shipping + labelling for the equivilant of a patch sounds a little steep)
The later option sounds a lot more lawsuit proof to me. This means that you can focus releases on new features, rather than patching bugs which also sounds more agile. That seems to be microsoft's strategy today. Is it still open to lawsuits? yes. Is it open to a lawsuit of the nature in this case (where people don't want to pay for something they have already bought)? No. The only other type of possible lawsuit from the angle of bugs is one where damage is done due to negligence on microsoft's part. But that wasn't what this case was about (they were specific on the cost of "upgrading" due to such a bug, not the bug itself).
Progress can be taken to mean many things. I consider progress from microsoft to be that I'm not afraid of the system crashing when I'm doing something import. And 2000/XP is progress on that front. In more abstract terms, I consider progress to be writing software that gives the desired result at all times.
As for innovation, while I do consider it a good thing, it admittingly can come at a price of stability (in all programs, take the linux kernel's unstable builds as an example). And given my desire for correctness, I would rather programs that just do what I want, rather than do something that everyone wants (best tool for the job). An example of this would be turning services on (in any operating system) by default, that the average user will not use. Of course, the obvious other point one could make is when both Netscape and IE were in a feature race, where those features were highly unstable at times. And finally, if innovation is rushed, it can create terrible standards, that need backwards compatibility.
I would like to point out that innovation isn't as lacking as one may believe. Given that the best programmers I've both met and heard of seem to like to push the boundaries of what the machines can do. The only strain on this quality is resources.
As for the case she took, I think it boils down to a contract being signed in blind faith. And even though it may be irrelevant to the matter at hand, her position may be legally correct. Of course, I am not a lawyer, so I don't know.
Java's been a huge investment for Sun. Yet, not as profitable as they would like (considering it's ubiquity). Assuming that this client uses ads, and Java (it would make sence). They may finally earn a little back at the cost of the time taken to build the new office suite.
That being said, that wouldn't be the best strategy available from a monitary perspective. In this case, java would be considered a sunk cost. And I can't see any PHB's, even at sun, thinking otherwise.
So, the strategy is probably focused on promoting Operating System agnostism. And, if sun is lucky, get attention and prove (to the average person, not programmers and admins) that they are relevant. Hence, the potential for long term gain. In this case, breaking even on the investment is well worth it.
I don't think this is a game that Microsoft wants to play because no matter what the outcome they have to lose, with the exceptional case of this not catching on. But if google promotes it, at the very least, free office software should get attention no matter what.
This is just my 2 cents, but with exchange rates I think it only amounts to 1.
If you have WPA available to both machines, why are you using WEP?
Other than that, I want to know how the editors let a windows tech support question on a *nix biased board. Hell, even if it was, "I can't get iwconfig to work properly, and I think it's the way I've used ndiswrapper, are there any other open source tools or drivers available?" I still don't think it should have been accepted.
Next up on slashdot from the why-the-fuck dept. "How do I put IE on linux using WINE?"
How well does investing in a product that is already popular work?
.com bubble...
I ask this, because let's assume it is good advice. Then the tactic works, more VCs will be looking for "opportunity" (I use quotations because if the product is popular meaning many eyes can and are looking at it, then that opportunity will be exploited to any means necessary, until there is nothing left to exploit, meaning not much opportunity) which will limit the gains of the sector. At least that is what my rudimentary knowledge of economics is telling me.
Kinda sounds like the
1) Get users
2) ??? (see FREELOADING. in the article)
3) Profit!
And if it doesn't work, then move along nothing to see here.
To which I agree with you. Hence my favourtism for computer science over a college course (Note: I use the Canadian version of the term college). But that is more about the quality of work rather than quantity (which is one of those reasons that keeping the "status quo" of the computing world scares me).
I suppose I should have stated it from a different prespective and emphasized the "solution of the times" aspect... Where the better solution gains wide acceptance and is entrenched... And it's easier to change people than change technology...
In which case your QWERTY argument is better.
"Militarily, just imagine if the military minds of Julius Caesar, Alexander and Cromwell held commanded in today's battlefields."
Code-wise, picture if the old COBOL programmers today were kept in the workforce for another dozen decades. I think it's a shame that a langauge as old as my father is still being used by my father at his age. Likewise, if I'm using C++ when I'm nearing 50.
Old -> legacy -> entrenchment... The only escape is when cost(refractoring_to_new) cost(maintaining_old)... Which is starting to happen in the case of COBOL due to the aging of that generation...
Not to say that old things are bad, it's just that they typically were solutions for their day. Picture this, one day (probably within our lifetimes), people might look at Java as an efficient language. It sounds kinda funny to us. But go back 30 years and tell an assembly programmer that C is efficient.
I never got the point of those piracy ads... I'm already in the fucking theatre, paying for the movie! What are they hoping that the cam producers have an 11th hour realization that "capturing movies and distributing them in poor quality is bad"?
"If he fails, these crooks will never be stopped."
What ever happened to the various Mafias? I know, they're old school criminals. And I know that they aren't as good in the courts as the RIAA. But I do know that they get the job done.
All I'm saying is that we should give the RIAA a taste of intimidation, it's been their modus operandi for some time now, and payback's a bitch.
The conservatives (~100 seats) and liberals will probably go for it, the ndp will be against it (I believe they hold 19 seats, and would be needed if the liberals didn't have any other support), and god only knows what the bloc will do (52 seats, I believe...).
In short, it's probably going through.