This is the most insightful reply I've read. There is truth in what you say.
I would just note that many, many large Microsoft competitors are felled by their own incompetence -- Netscape springs most readily to mind, although RealNetworks and AOL are getting there fast. Ashton Tate, Lotus.
Google and Adobe seem to be doing fine, although notably neither was born on the Windows platform, they came late to Windows.
In any case, Apple is hardly better on this score, iTunes for one borrowed heavily from a shareware offering whose name escapes me at the moment, ditto for the Dashboard. And Linux is hardly friendly ground for closed-source software firms. Of course open source projects are another matter.
He said the company's software partners, in developing and adapting their own products for the two launches, would invest 20 times as much as Microsoft
Right there is why Microsoft is the most successful software company in the world -- respect for developers.
It's all well and good to laugh at Steve Ballmer sweating like an ape on a stage and shouting about developers. It's fine to feel smug and superior using Mac OS or Linux (I'm using both write now myself).
But Microsoft has always respected the work of developers coding to their platform. Backward compatibility is a religion at Microsoft, by all accountts. Which is good because they're, um, a platform vendor.
Sounds simple, but it is amazing how often this is screwed up. Apple is notorious for breaking old programs that didn't interpret the Mac API just right -- or that relied on a technology fad Apple pumped and abandoned (OpenDoc, QuickDraw GX, Publish + Subscribe, etc etc).
Apache Foundation did the same thing moving from httpd v1 to v2 -- PHP took quite a long time to move over and at one point was telling people not to even try using it with v2.
Firefox seems to do it on every release with its extensions.
Backward compatibility might not give warm fuzzies to the systems programmers -- it is hard, inelegant work. But it is a boon to users and application programmers.
I only use Linux on the server, where I don't run into backward compatibility issues, but from what I understand the drivers often have to be rewritten from release to release.
I'm not in love with Windows or Microsoft, but I will continue using their OS becase of the sheer range of CHOICES in terms of software and hardware, and the fact that all my old stuff can migrate to a new machine.
So go ahead, laugh at Microsoft, har dee har, "u r d3layed AG@1N!" For your purposes -- programming, running a server -- Linux may be the best. Or Mac OS X for that plus video editing, publishing, and other tasks and price points that don't require the full diversity of Wintel.
But for most computer users, Windows offers wins because of its compatibility with an incredibly array of cheap hardware and an incredible back (and forward) catalog of software. Microsoft knows this, and THAT'S why they are going to wait until Vista is just right. Yes they screwed the pooch, but they are attempting something that neither Linux nor OS X can touch.
All I can say about this "Jonathan Miller" is that he's an incredible visionary and way ahead of his time.
For those unfamiliar with his vision for the future, Mr. Miller would replace our telephone modulator-demodulators with an "Ethernet" entering the home over thick black cables -- or perhaps even copper telephone wiring!
Anyone the world over could view America OnLine's pictures through an interconnected "Web" of compters independent of the company. They could even manipulate America OnLine's own computers to "search" this "Web!" How very generous!!
This new vision for inter-networking has already caught on with the kids, who have crowned it "CyberWeb 2.0" or somesuch.
I would explain further, but I must telegraph my stockbroker posthaste, to see if we can't convince this America OnLine to detach itself from old Time Inc. and sell off its own shares! It's growth potential is simply ex-plosive!
Posting via dictaphone, Charles Fornwall Huston XII
Can Intel afford to make a misstep now with even in the small subset of users running RAID 5 systems?
No. No, it cannot. Sell your stock. Rip the CPU out of your boxen. One hundred ten billion dollars in market capitalization has disappeared in a flash with the publication of this groundbreaking article in the Inquirer.
Intel has signed its own death warrant. As goes RAID5, so goes the world.
"PS, This has nothing to do with the fact that June 30 is the end of the fiscal year and a slow news day at the start of a long holiday, you cynical bastards. Love, Taco, Neal & the Whole Gang."
I have mod privs but no one else is asking this question, at least not in a respectful manner, so here goes:
I understand the impetus behind CSS, and think it has brought some nifty things to the Web, particularly in terms of integrating with the DOM and thus helping usher in all the AJAXy goodness we're seeing lately.
But CSS also seems to have spawned an anti-HTML jihad movement of people who rail against simple but effective HTML markup, including for example the B, I and FONT tags and the TABLE. Many people seem to make the principle of separating presentation from content a religious issue.
I learned HTML in 1994 by using the View Source command in Mosaic and Netscape (beta). The simplicity of the tags made it very easy. I could keep the basic structure of a doc in my head: "<html><head><title>Home Page</title></head><body><p>Hello, <b>world</b>!</body></html>"
For all the strenghts of CSS+XHTML, they are significantly more complicated to learn than basic HTML.
Do you worry that CSS is scaring off new Web writers, espeically since basic HTML is increasingly deprecated among Web developers?
The term "Neo-Patronage" is perhaps the most unintentionally revealing phrase since "Politically Correct." Just reading "Neo-Patronage" sends shivers up my spine.
I believe Miriam-Webster is instructive on this point:
One entry found for patronize. Main Entry: patronize Pronunciation: 'pA-tr&-"nIz, 'pa- Function: transitive verb Inflected Form(s): -ized; -izing 1 : to act as patron of : provide aid or support for 2 : to adopt an air of condescension toward : treat haughtily or coolly 3 : to be a frequent or regular customer or client of
If an artist CHOOSES to contribute his work under this "system," then fine.
But it boggles my mind why anyone would want to put himself in the position of a feudal serf. I would rather give my work away freely or to sell it at a fair price.
The main goal is to tap into the ability of every child to toss away a manual and figure out how to make gadgets work on their own...
... so that by age 18 they can change their professional name to "Bob" and tell Americans weaned on PlayStations that "WiFi connections do not involve 'gremlins,' sir;" "any software company offering free pornography for each install probably should not be trusted" and "there is no 'feng shui' component on your iPod, and if there were it would not be defective, and if it were defective then no, it would not be covered by AppleCare."
I want to make sure I understand this correctly: Osama bin Laden is about to get faster broadband Internet on his laptop in some mud hut in Pakistan than I could possibly buy at home in the U.S.?
Mac developers and power users no longer have the freedom to alter, rebuild, and replace the OS X kernel from source code
Or, as rewritten by Apple marketing for your black turtleneck wearing, latte-sipping Mac hipsters out there:
Apple is proud to announce QuickKernelTM, the completely revamped heart of Mac OS X. With patented, proprietaty innovations optimised for the high performance IntelTM Dual CoreTM architecture, QuickKernel is offered as an exlusive benefit to new Apple customers. Buy an Intel-based Macintosh today, and we'll throw in QuickKernelTM for free!
"We are excited to announce that we're making QuickKernelTM retroactively available to anyone who bought an Intel-based Mac within the past five years," CEO Steve Jobs said. "But act fast -- this free offer will not last long. We estimate QuickKernel adds at least $199 in raw speed enhancement to every Macintosh sold."
QuickKernel further boosts speed with its ClosedSourceTM architecture, which prevents performance hiccups caused by "credits," "comments" and "disclaimers" typically added to the "source code" of the open source kernel typically used to repair WindowsTM PCs. ClosedSource is delivered in a highly optimized UberBinaryTM format that is many times faster than the uncompiled source code delivered by "open source" operating system vendors.
"QuickKernel is the fastest way to deliver content to your iPod, greatly accelerating MP3 playback," Jobs said. "It also keeps your black shirt from fading in the wash, disappears scratches from your U2 EditionTM iPod and enhances the graphics on your Ruby on Rails blog."
Right, because you are clearly intimately familiar with the RFP, its goals, the various bids, the selection process and have an explanation of why it needed to be put out for bid in the first place. Oh, and you have knowledge the selection process was completely free of non-market (aka political) influence, surely.
This is all true, since we live in a "perfect capitalist world."
As someone who works in San Francisco and has a grasp of basic math, let me explain why this is a total giveaway to Earthlink.
If they had just taxed 740,000 San Franciscans, they could have raised the $15 million Earthlink says is needed to build the network at a TOTAL cost of $20.27 per person.
That's $20. Not per month, not per year, but for 10 years of free wireless service. Considering the city's tax base works out to $7,100 per citizen per year (paid partly by businesses of course), that's quite a bargain.
The annual budget for San Francisco is about $5 billion. According to the article, the initial cost to deploy this wireless network is estimated at $6 million to $8 million, or roughly 1/1000th of the city budget.
Earthlink has been granted a monopoly on city property and exemptions from certain regulations to build a citywide WiFi network. (Google is just leasing from them.) In exchange, they generously agree to rent the network for $20 per month to an average chump, or at some unspecified rate to Google, who will offer it for "free" to users.
Basic math: at $20 per sub per month, Earthlink only needs about 35,000 subscribers to recoup their worst-case build out cost within ONE YEAR.
If Google is paying them just a quarter of that, they would only need about 18 percent of the SF population, which is right around what they plan to get. Of course, after the first year they are minting money, since by their own estimate the maintence cost is about $1 million per year, plus customer support (only for paid customers surely) and billing.
In other words, the people of San Francisco will pay every single year the total cost to build the network. All this to avoid the evil of taxes and to experience the EFFICIENCY OF THE MARKET.
I am beginning to lose the fervent blind capitalist leanings of my youth because I live in San Francisco. Not surprising that this happened, but I am surprised at how.
Eeeeeeuuuuuwww! I'm Rep. Marlin Schneider, D-Wisconsin Rapids! I don't think people should be forced to have microchips implanted under their skin! Look at me!
Oooh, ooh, I need to change my shirt! My heart has bled all over it!
Could I be any more liberal if I tried? Perhaps if I were a communist. Ooops, no -- even communists favor mandatory invasive surveillance!
I'm all about "rights" and "civil liberties" and "the Constitution." I don't support "extraordinary rendition" of "American citizens" to "cruel and repressive Middle Easter regimes" to be "brutally tortured!"
I don't think the police should be allowed to hook electrodes to people's testicles, or hand them off to the Army where they are held for years without access to a lawyer!
I believe in a zone of "privacy" that extends all the way to the upper surface of the skin, because I'm a neo-anarchist far-left ultra-liberal freak!
I love to read insane quotes like: "Wisconsin would be the first state to say, 'Hey, at least get our permission first'," Albrecht said.
Seriously, man, if we let these pinko Democrats in Wisconsin just BAN mandatory injection of tracking chips into the skin, the next thing you know they'll be demanding warrants for phone taps and outlawing mandatory forehead bar codes!!
The only real solution to stop from being misled by online con artists is to examine each link in a chain of Internet communication to ensure it is from a trustworthy, reliable source.
Email address, Web URL, refering party -- each should be bulletproof BEFORE you extend your trust. Otherwise, you might get scammed.
Take this article. We know it's reliable and trustworthy. How?
Well it was submitted by "anonymous reader," who has posted many a fine gem on this here site.
Then it was filtered by an "editor" named "ScuttleMonkey." How can you not trust a monkey? Monkeys rock!
Then, when you click on the link, you see you have been taken to "Spam Daily News," a bastion of journalistic integrity that makes the New York Times look like the New York Times before Judy Miller got fired.
Finally, the whole thing originated from a little place we like to call "Slashdot." I think the quality of this brand needs no elaboration.
So as you can see, it is not hard to recognize a secure, reliable, not-at-all-misleading-or-shady chain of Internet links. Happy surfing!
The website Low End Mac says this article was written by "avid history buff" Tom Hormby. Hormby may be a buff, but clearly he is no historian.
Where the heck does he get this stuff? If he gets it from other people's books or articles (my guess), he needs to credit them, if only so we can evaluate the quality of the information. But this history contains no cites of any kind.
If Hormby is actually gatherting the information himself, through interviews or a large cache of secondary sources, he needs to explain this now and again in the text. For example, instead of "It was at DEC where Spindler gained a reputation for his work ethic," he could state "It was at DEC where Spindler proved he could work hard, a friend said."
This is the kind of vague, uncited, unsourced "information" that gives the Web a bad name. If it is coming from an established brand like nytimes.com, maybe (_maybe_) we could take their word for certain details. But if our only basis for judging this guy is his gmail address, we need more specifics on his information gathering.
OK, now I feel fairly dumb: after Googling for "vcal holidays" I found a page that stated Palm Desktop 4+ ship with holiday files. I ran a Help search for "holidays" in Palm Desktop, which told me:
Importing holidays into Date Book
You can import files into Palm(TM) Desktop software that add holidays to your Date Book.
To import holidays:
1. From the File menu, choose Import.
2. Go to the Palm folder, open the folder Holiday Files, and then open the folder Import Files.
3. Select the file to import, and click Import.
The holiday files are vCal files, so you can also go to the folder in which the holiday files are stored and drag the files into Date Book.
It seems to, um, work.
For what it's worth, I asked a friend of a friend who works at Palm why there were no holidays and he never mentioned this. Oh well.
But in any case Palm Desktop will not import the DBA file, pops up an error dialog about it being an unsupported format. Maybe because I'm on a Mac? This is precisely why Palm should build it in.
Slashdot Mirror
This is the most insightful reply I've read. There is truth in what you say.
I would just note that many, many large Microsoft competitors are felled by their own incompetence -- Netscape springs most readily to mind, although RealNetworks and AOL are getting there fast. Ashton Tate, Lotus.
Google and Adobe seem to be doing fine, although notably neither was born on the Windows platform, they came late to Windows.
In any case, Apple is hardly better on this score, iTunes for one borrowed heavily from a shareware offering whose name escapes me at the moment, ditto for the Dashboard. And Linux is hardly friendly ground for closed-source software firms. Of course open source projects are another matter.
He said the company's software partners, in developing and adapting their own products for the two launches, would invest 20 times as much as Microsoft
Right there is why Microsoft is the most successful software company in the world -- respect for developers.
It's all well and good to laugh at Steve Ballmer sweating like an ape on a stage and shouting about developers. It's fine to feel smug and superior using Mac OS or Linux (I'm using both write now myself).
But Microsoft has always respected the work of developers coding to their platform. Backward compatibility is a religion at Microsoft, by all accountts. Which is good because they're, um, a platform vendor.
Sounds simple, but it is amazing how often this is screwed up. Apple is notorious for breaking old programs that didn't interpret the Mac API just right -- or that relied on a technology fad Apple pumped and abandoned (OpenDoc, QuickDraw GX, Publish + Subscribe, etc etc).
Apache Foundation did the same thing moving from httpd v1 to v2 -- PHP took quite a long time to move over and at one point was telling people not to even try using it with v2.
Firefox seems to do it on every release with its extensions.
Backward compatibility might not give warm fuzzies to the systems programmers -- it is hard, inelegant work. But it is a boon to users and application programmers.
I only use Linux on the server, where I don't run into backward compatibility issues, but from what I understand the drivers often have to be rewritten from release to release.
I'm not in love with Windows or Microsoft, but I will continue using their OS becase of the sheer range of CHOICES in terms of software and hardware, and the fact that all my old stuff can migrate to a new machine.
So go ahead, laugh at Microsoft, har dee har, "u r d3layed AG@1N!" For your purposes -- programming, running a server -- Linux may be the best. Or Mac OS X for that plus video editing, publishing, and other tasks and price points that don't require the full diversity of Wintel.
But for most computer users, Windows offers wins because of its compatibility with an incredibly array of cheap hardware and an incredible back (and forward) catalog of software. Microsoft knows this, and THAT'S why they are going to wait until Vista is just right. Yes they screwed the pooch, but they are attempting something that neither Linux nor OS X can touch.
All I can say about this "Jonathan Miller" is that he's an incredible visionary and way ahead of his time.
For those unfamiliar with his vision for the future, Mr. Miller would replace our telephone modulator-demodulators with an "Ethernet" entering the home over thick black cables -- or perhaps even copper telephone wiring!
Anyone the world over could view America OnLine's pictures through an interconnected "Web" of compters independent of the company. They could even manipulate America OnLine's own computers to "search" this "Web!" How very generous!!
This new vision for inter-networking has already caught on with the kids, who have crowned it "CyberWeb 2.0" or somesuch.
I would explain further, but I must telegraph my stockbroker posthaste, to see if we can't convince this America OnLine to detach itself from old Time Inc. and sell off its own shares! It's growth potential is simply ex-plosive!
Posting via dictaphone,
Charles Fornwall Huston XII
Can Intel afford to make a misstep now with even in the small subset of users running RAID 5 systems?
No. No, it cannot. Sell your stock. Rip the CPU out of your boxen. One hundred ten billion dollars in market capitalization has disappeared in a flash with the publication of this groundbreaking article in the Inquirer.
Intel has signed its own death warrant. As goes RAID5, so goes the world.
"PS, This has nothing to do with the fact that June 30 is the end of the fiscal year and a slow news day at the start of a long holiday, you cynical bastards. Love, Taco, Neal & the Whole Gang."
Funniest Slashdot post in weeks (fer real -- although I just accidentally posted that on another thread)
"A Slashdot article just went by, and then another one that looks just like it!"
"It's a glitch in the rootkit! It happens when it changes something!"
"No, I said a SLASHDOT article."
"Ah, you're probably fine then."
South Korea!
First they had a veterinarian who claimed to clone the first human!
Now they have a PHYSICIST who claims to be an expert on EBAY AUCTIONS!
Next up: a lawyer who can communicate with dolphins!
Yay Korea! Insane on both halves of the peninsla!
I have mod privs but no one else is asking this question, at least not in a respectful manner, so here goes:
I understand the impetus behind CSS, and think it has brought some nifty things to the Web, particularly in terms of integrating with the DOM and thus helping usher in all the AJAXy goodness we're seeing lately.
But CSS also seems to have spawned an anti-HTML jihad movement of people who rail against simple but effective HTML markup, including for example the B, I and FONT tags and the TABLE. Many people seem to make the principle of separating presentation from content a religious issue.
I learned HTML in 1994 by using the View Source command in Mosaic and Netscape (beta). The simplicity of the tags made it very easy. I could keep the basic structure of a doc in my head: "<html><head><title>Home Page</title></head><body><p>Hello, <b>world</b>!</body></html>"
For all the strenghts of CSS+XHTML, they are significantly more complicated to learn than basic HTML.
Do you worry that CSS is scaring off new Web writers, espeically since basic HTML is increasingly deprecated among Web developers?
I believe Miriam-Webster is instructive on this point:
One entry found for patronize.
Main Entry: patronize
Pronunciation: 'pA-tr&-"nIz, 'pa-
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -ized; -izing
1 : to act as patron of : provide aid or support for
2 : to adopt an air of condescension toward : treat haughtily or coolly
3 : to be a frequent or regular customer or client of
If an artist CHOOSES to contribute his work under this "system," then fine.
But it boggles my mind why anyone would want to put himself in the position of a feudal serf. I would rather give my work away freely or to sell it at a fair price.
Until then -- pshh, whatever.
... so that by age 18 they can change their professional name to "Bob" and tell Americans weaned on PlayStations that "WiFi connections do not involve 'gremlins,' sir;" "any software company offering free pornography for each install probably should not be trusted" and "there is no 'feng shui' component on your iPod, and if there were it would not be defective, and if it were defective then no, it would not be covered by AppleCare."
Yay capitalism ;->
p0wn3d, man. Fucking p0wn3d.
Or, as rewritten by Apple marketing for your black turtleneck wearing, latte-sipping Mac hipsters out there:
Apple is proud to announce QuickKernelTM, the completely revamped heart of Mac OS X. With patented, proprietaty innovations optimised for the high performance IntelTM Dual CoreTM architecture, QuickKernel is offered as an exlusive benefit to new Apple customers. Buy an Intel-based Macintosh today, and we'll throw in QuickKernelTM for free!
"We are excited to announce that we're making QuickKernelTM retroactively available to anyone who bought an Intel-based Mac within the past five years," CEO Steve Jobs said. "But act fast -- this free offer will not last long. We estimate QuickKernel adds at least $199 in raw speed enhancement to every Macintosh sold."
QuickKernel further boosts speed with its ClosedSourceTM architecture, which prevents performance hiccups caused by "credits," "comments" and "disclaimers" typically added to the "source code" of the open source kernel typically used to repair WindowsTM PCs. ClosedSource is delivered in a highly optimized UberBinaryTM format that is many times faster than the uncompiled source code delivered by "open source" operating system vendors.
"QuickKernel is the fastest way to deliver content to your iPod, greatly accelerating MP3 playback," Jobs said. "It also keeps your black shirt from fading in the wash, disappears scratches from your U2 EditionTM iPod and enhances the graphics on your Ruby on Rails blog."
This is all true, since we live in a "perfect capitalist world."
The $15 million *includes* maintenance and upgrades, as stated in TFA. The figure is the total cost to "build, manage and provide service."
Woops, got link wrong. The budget stat is from: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/ch ronicle/archive/2005/07/20/BAGV0DQLD01.DTL
If they had just taxed 740,000 San Franciscans, they could have raised the $15 million Earthlink says is needed to build the network at a TOTAL cost of $20.27 per person.
That's $20. Not per month, not per year, but for 10 years of free wireless service. Considering the city's tax base works out to $7,100 per citizen per year (paid partly by businesses of course), that's quite a bargain.
The annual budget for San Francisco is about $5 billion. According to the article, the initial cost to deploy this wireless network is estimated at $6 million to $8 million, or roughly 1/1000th of the city budget.
Earthlink has been granted a monopoly on city property and exemptions from certain regulations to build a citywide WiFi network. (Google is just leasing from them.) In exchange, they generously agree to rent the network for $20 per month to an average chump, or at some unspecified rate to Google, who will offer it for "free" to users.
Basic math: at $20 per sub per month, Earthlink only needs about 35,000 subscribers to recoup their worst-case build out cost within ONE YEAR.
If Google is paying them just a quarter of that, they would only need about 18 percent of the SF population, which is right around what they plan to get. Of course, after the first year they are minting money, since by their own estimate the maintence cost is about $1 million per year, plus customer support (only for paid customers surely) and billing.
In other words, the people of San Francisco will pay every single year the total cost to build the network. All this to avoid the evil of taxes and to experience the EFFICIENCY OF THE MARKET.
I am beginning to lose the fervent blind capitalist leanings of my youth because I live in San Francisco. Not surprising that this happened, but I am surprised at how.
Try saying $|++; $@?@^W--:!s/$#_/$_/g while <>; for 3000 lines !
My throat will never recover!
Oooh, ooh, I need to change my shirt! My heart has bled all over it!
Could I be any more liberal if I tried? Perhaps if I were a communist. Ooops, no -- even communists favor mandatory invasive surveillance!
I'm all about "rights" and "civil liberties" and "the Constitution." I don't support "extraordinary rendition" of "American citizens" to "cruel and repressive Middle Easter regimes" to be "brutally tortured!"
I don't think the police should be allowed to hook electrodes to people's testicles, or hand them off to the Army where they are held for years without access to a lawyer!
I believe in a zone of "privacy" that extends all the way to the upper surface of the skin, because I'm a neo-anarchist far-left ultra-liberal freak!
I love to read insane quotes like: "Wisconsin would be the first state to say, 'Hey, at least get our permission first'," Albrecht said.
Seriously, man, if we let these pinko Democrats in Wisconsin just BAN mandatory injection of tracking chips into the skin, the next thing you know they'll be demanding warrants for phone taps and outlawing mandatory forehead bar codes!!
Email address, Web URL, refering party -- each should be bulletproof BEFORE you extend your trust. Otherwise, you might get scammed.
Take this article. We know it's reliable and trustworthy. How?
Well it was submitted by "anonymous reader," who has posted many a fine gem on this here site.
Then it was filtered by an "editor" named "ScuttleMonkey." How can you not trust a monkey? Monkeys rock!
Then, when you click on the link, you see you have been taken to "Spam Daily News," a bastion of journalistic integrity that makes the New York Times look like the New York Times before Judy Miller got fired.
Finally, the whole thing originated from a little place we like to call "Slashdot." I think the quality of this brand needs no elaboration.
So as you can see, it is not hard to recognize a secure, reliable, not-at-all-misleading-or-shady chain of Internet links. Happy surfing!
Where the heck does he get this stuff? If he gets it from other people's books or articles (my guess), he needs to credit them, if only so we can evaluate the quality of the information. But this history contains no cites of any kind.
If Hormby is actually gatherting the information himself, through interviews or a large cache of secondary sources, he needs to explain this now and again in the text. For example, instead of "It was at DEC where Spindler gained a reputation for his work ethic," he could state "It was at DEC where Spindler proved he could work hard, a friend said."
This is the kind of vague, uncited, unsourced "information" that gives the Web a bad name. If it is coming from an established brand like nytimes.com, maybe (_maybe_) we could take their word for certain details. But if our only basis for judging this guy is his gmail address, we need more specifics on his information gathering.
It seems to, um, work.
For what it's worth, I asked a friend of a friend who works at Palm why there were no holidays and he never mentioned this. Oh well.
http://www.assburger.org/defcon-13/
By the way, I love how Palm won't even host user-made freeware for their own platform. Only paid software. Genius.
As I said, Palm sucks ass. I rest my case.
http://www.martinsmaha.net/software/index_Page34 7.html
But in any case Palm Desktop will not import the DBA file, pops up an error dialog about it being an unsupported format. Maybe because I'm on a Mac? This is precisely why Palm should build it in.