The first startrek game I played back in '76 was (at least for its time) a very good game. The version I used was written in Basic and was available on the university's interactive computer system.
That is a dangerous assumtion. CP/M was firmly entrenched, then along came PCs and DOS. Wordperfect had most of the wordprocessing market, then Word overtook it. The assumtion that because something is entrenched people will continue to buy it only works until its sucessor arrives and ousts it.
While I agree that it is an over generalisation, I think that many Linux applications and utilities more friendly (or rather easier to use) than many Windows ones. The Windows ones may be easier for a beginner to learn, but personally I do not the multi-level menus and dialog boxes - once you know what you want to do they can be very unfriendly as they slow down your access to the function you want. For example, the File-Open dialog is reasonable standard on Windows. For opening a file in the current (or the directory the application decides to present to you) this is fine, but I find having to navigate up the tree and then down again a bit of a pain. Granted that you can type the filename into the text box, but there is no filename completion. I find the *nix shell "tab" completion far easier and friendlier. Also I hate the way that windows applications can 'steal' the focus. You are working on one application, and another wants your intention and decides that its need of your input is more important than the application you are working with so if you are not careful you can find yourself interacting with the "wrong" application.
Though isn't the command line compiler still VC++? Computer language utilities is where Microsoft started, and where have traditionally been quite good. Back in the CP/M80 days wasn't the best Z80 macro-assembler the Microsoft one?
Surely, under these regulations, if you receive unsolicited software through the post then your right to "use" it includes running it. As for an EULA, would the regulations not make this null and void? So that if the EULA attempts to restrict rights you would have in the absence of the EULA, then you retain these rights.
If you receive unsolicited software, books etc, then you can do what you like with the copy you received except for creating another copy. Reading the book, running the software, burning it, throwing it in the trash, using the book as toilet paper, or giving it away to someone else should all be fair game. Making copies and distributing them is not.
Why not? From what I have read on/., as well as reading its own 'special' barcodes the Cuecat will read ordinary ones. So, especially considering the availability of 3rd party drivers, does this not make Cuecat compete with companies who market barcode readers? Or are you saying that the reason it is not competing is that the people to whom cuecats are given would not otherwise have wanted a barcode reader so would not have considered buying one?
Giving away the cuecat may help the company giving it away, but it certainly does not help (and might even be considered unfair competition by) the companies who sell barcode readers.
I have seen licencing agreements where the royalties are a percentage of the unit cost. In the case an opensource project, whatever percentage of zero they claim the amount is always $0.
Which, even if you agree with software patents (which I do not), considering the rate of change within the industry/art is MUCH too long an interval between filing and publishing. The stated objective and reason d'être of patents is to increase the pool of knowledge and such a long interval does not do this at all.
Not in the same way. You own the physical AOL CD, and you can do almost anything (legal) you like with it. You can use it as a cofee mat, a frizbee, you can use it as a mirror.... etc. However, you do not own the software on the CD.
Cue:Cat is different as it is hardware, so as long as you do not try replicating it then you should be able to be able to do almost anything you choose with it.
Or like UK income tax. The legislation to enable this was originally only passed by parliament on the strict understanding that it was a temporary measure to pay for the Napoleonic war.
The same is true accross the different Amazon sites. For example, I looked for a CD on www.amazon.co.uk and was quoted £15.99 with a 4-6 week delivery (ie normal - non stock timing). Looking at the new www.amazon.fr site, the same CD was only £9.98 which even when adding Europe wide carriage is still less than the UK site, and having ordered it (from France) it was shipped less than 6 hours later.
When Demon introduced the ip based virtual hosting for the homepages service, they announced the intention of moving to named based virtual hosting - but as yet this has not happened.
Or even old Class 'C'. A company I worked for in the past went out of business about 7 years ago but I am sure that they (or rather the liquidator) did not hand back their class C ip range.
That is why a certificate is needed, but does it really matter in whose name the certificate is issued? As long as the certificate matches the server, does it matter if the certificate is in the name of "John Doe Retailer inc." or "A Web Hosting Corp"?
How many people accessing SSL sites actually care about the contents of the certificate? I suspect that many use SSL because the link is encrypted rather than because of the X.509 certificate.
Is putting meaningful information on picture content any more difficult that sub-titling TV programmes? At least here in the UK, teletext subtitling is very widespread, even for live programmes.
You do NOT need to already have a storecard to register with Tesco direct. When it first started you may have needed one, but when I registered with them in May this year I did not have a storecard so I was issued with an 'electronic' (ie it is just a number and cannot be used in the bricks & mortar store) storecard when I registered.
I do not buy (or did not until the site stopped working for me) fresh goods. Not having a car, I found it useful for buying frozen, tinned, bottled goods, packets of soap powder etc - all of which are either heavy or awkward to carry.
The current Tesco site does not even work correctly with Linux Netscape (4.73). It worked OK until the last layout change, but since then the frames are the wrong size and the 'main' frame obscures the bottom of the one containing the selection boxes. So, if the items you wish to purchase have to be selected from the bottom 2 or 3 rows of a menu then you are SOL.
I have the same problem both at home and at work. The only response I have had from Tescos has been how to set the screen resolution in Windows.
But in those days (or least when I was in that situation), newbies were not expected to know anything and were trained/taught and had their hands held and work checked before being allowed to "go solo". You cannot take on inexperienced staff (irrespective of paper qualifications) and expect them to be productive immediately.
IBM mainframe manuals used to be just as bad. There would be a problem, and the manual would say "Contact your Systems Programmer", but you are the systems programmer and you are looking at the manual to get some clue as what to do to rectify the problem!
Slashdot Mirror
The first startrek game I played back in '76 was (at least for its time) a very good game. The version I used was written in Basic and was available on the university's interactive computer system.
That is a dangerous assumtion. CP/M was firmly entrenched, then along came PCs and DOS. Wordperfect had most of the wordprocessing market, then Word overtook it. The assumtion that because something is entrenched people will continue to buy it only works until its sucessor arrives and ousts it.
While I agree that it is an over generalisation, I think that many Linux applications and utilities more friendly (or rather easier to use) than many Windows ones. The Windows ones may be easier for a beginner to learn, but personally I do not the multi-level menus and dialog boxes - once you know what you want to do they can be very unfriendly as they slow down your access to the function you want. For example, the File-Open dialog is reasonable standard on Windows. For opening a file in the current (or the directory the application decides to present to you) this is fine, but I find having to navigate up the tree and then down again a bit of a pain. Granted that you can type the filename into the text box, but there is no filename completion. I find the *nix shell "tab" completion far easier and friendlier. Also I hate the way that windows applications can 'steal' the focus. You are working on one application, and another wants your intention and decides that its need of your input is more important than the application you are working with so if you are not careful you can find yourself interacting with the "wrong" application.
Though isn't the command line compiler still VC++? Computer language utilities is where Microsoft started, and where have traditionally been quite good. Back in the CP/M80 days wasn't the best Z80 macro-assembler the Microsoft one?
Surely, under these regulations, if you receive unsolicited software through the post then your right to "use" it includes running it. As for an EULA, would the regulations not make this null and void? So that if the EULA attempts to restrict rights you would have in the absence of the EULA, then you retain these rights.
If you receive unsolicited software, books etc, then you can do what you like with the copy you received except for creating another copy. Reading the book, running the software, burning it, throwing it in the trash, using the book as toilet paper, or giving it away to someone else should all be fair game. Making copies and distributing them is not.
Why not? From what I have read on /., as well as reading its own 'special' barcodes the Cuecat will read ordinary ones. So, especially considering the availability of 3rd party drivers, does this not make Cuecat compete with companies who market barcode readers? Or are you saying that the reason it is not competing is that the people to whom cuecats are given would not otherwise have wanted a barcode reader so would not have considered buying one?
Giving away the cuecat may help the company giving it away, but it certainly does not help (and might even be considered unfair competition by) the companies who sell barcode readers.
I have seen licencing agreements where the royalties are a percentage of the unit cost. In the case an opensource project, whatever percentage of zero they claim the amount is always $0.
Which, even if you agree with software patents (which I do not), considering the rate of change within the industry/art is MUCH too long an interval between filing and publishing. The stated objective and reason d'être of patents is to increase the pool of knowledge and such a long interval does not do this at all.
Not in the same way. You own the physical AOL CD, and you can do almost anything (legal) you like with it. You can use it as a cofee mat, a frizbee, you can use it as a mirror.... etc. However, you do not own the software on the CD.
Cue:Cat is different as it is hardware, so as long as you do not try replicating it then you should be able to be able to do almost anything you choose with it.
Or like UK income tax. The legislation to enable this was originally only passed by parliament on the strict understanding that it was a temporary measure to pay for the Napoleonic war.
The same is true accross the different Amazon sites. For example, I looked for a CD on www.amazon.co.uk and was quoted £15.99 with a 4-6 week delivery (ie normal - non stock timing). Looking at the new www.amazon.fr site, the same CD was only £9.98 which even when adding Europe wide carriage is still less than the UK site, and having ordered it (from France) it was shipped less than 6 hours later.
Since when has it been mandatory for a PC running Word to be internet connected?
When Demon introduced the ip based virtual hosting for the homepages service, they announced the intention of moving to named based virtual hosting - but as yet this has not happened.
Or even old Class 'C'. A company I worked for in the past went out of business about 7 years ago but I am sure that they (or rather the liquidator) did not hand back their class C ip range.
That is why a certificate is needed, but does it really matter in whose name the certificate is issued? As long as the certificate matches the server, does it matter if the certificate is in the name of "John Doe Retailer inc." or "A Web Hosting Corp"?
How many people accessing SSL sites actually care about the contents of the certificate? I suspect that many use SSL because the link is encrypted rather than because of the X.509 certificate.
In that case should the certificate not be issued to the hosting site rather than be for the virtual hosted site?
Is putting meaningful information on picture content any more difficult that sub-titling TV programmes? At least here in the UK, teletext subtitling is very widespread, even for live programmes.
You do NOT need to already have a storecard to register with Tesco direct. When it first started you may have needed one, but when I registered with them in May this year I did not have a storecard so I was issued with an 'electronic' (ie it is just a number and cannot be used in the bricks & mortar store) storecard when I registered.
I do not buy (or did not until the site stopped working for me) fresh goods. Not having a car, I found it useful for buying frozen, tinned, bottled goods, packets of soap powder etc - all of which are either heavy or awkward to carry.
The current Tesco site does not even work correctly with Linux Netscape (4.73). It worked OK until the last layout change, but since then the frames are the wrong size and the 'main' frame obscures the bottom of the one containing the selection boxes. So, if the items you wish to purchase have to be selected from the bottom 2 or 3 rows of a menu then you are SOL. I have the same problem both at home and at work. The only response I have had from Tescos has been how to set the screen resolution in Windows.
But in those days (or least when I was in that situation), newbies were not expected to know anything and were trained/taught and had their hands held and work checked before being allowed to "go solo". You cannot take on inexperienced staff (irrespective of paper qualifications) and expect them to be productive immediately.
IBM mainframe manuals used to be just as bad. There would be a problem, and the manual would say "Contact your Systems Programmer", but you are the systems programmer and you are looking at the manual to get some clue as what to do to rectify the problem!