They tell him they can't identify which part(s) of their own Terms of Service have been violated and then tell the guy if he has any questions he should review their terms of service for the answers. WTF over. The term Sophomoric comes to mind.
At the very least they should have changed their ToS and then notified him of what he's violated.
Mr Rosen, is that you? Rosen Motors did this in the '90s but based their business on getting the US Big Three to buy into it. Silly boys for thinking Ford, GM, or Chrysler cared about efficiency.
I've been called a _hater_ a few times while trying to use logic and reasoning to explain an opposing view. Using such a label does not make you any smarter even though it may make you feel that way. It should be, Live and let live but accept change. shit happens.
not sure about the haters but regarding/. "haters" you are probably more wrong there than right. Much of what you see has _hate_ is a long running disdain for how certain companies have operated and/or are operating. Some of those actions were legal but many were not and all were not for the good of _may the better technology win_ mantra. I used to be a fan of Microsoft until I saw the first version of NT was _not_ the new desktop computer they were saying it was. Moving to the next best technology at the time, OS/2, was an eye opener regarding how far Microsoft was willing to go to make sure OS/2 did not gain a foothold. It's taken years to build the kind of disdain you see here on/. and things like the ramrodding of MS-OOXML through ISO and making a mockery of ISO show that it is still business as usual there. For others it was/is IBM, or Sony, or ______. It's not blind faith when the geek community grabs onto something and it's usually for some technical reason even if slight. When they oppose those who fight to destroy their projects or community it's far less likely to be because of fanboyism while it can look that way without knowing the history behind it all./. does have lots of noob's who probably fall under the fanboi label but reading one or two posts from then and you should easily filter them as such.
and like the religious fanboyism, most do not really chose the _product_ but are marketed the _product_ and lock onto it use only that as the basis of their _choice_. Now, anyone with opposing views is a threat to their decision making even when they really didn't make a choice but had one put into their hand or mind. They'll even become very hypocritical defending it and not see the hypocrisy. This is also _very_ much a political thing too. More so with the US Republican party but not exclusively theirs.
and adding on computer illiteracy, does this number really surprise anyone? Don't forget, a computer illiterate customer is a happy customer and a gold mine.
is that why we're hearing ARM SoC vendors talking about quad core SoC's running at over 1.5Ghz for Windows 8?
Funny thing is, I was saying what you said in 1996 when the OS/2 Warp was released and for the 3rd time it was faster and more efficient than the previous release. 15 years later and this is a possibility with a version of Windows not yet released and promised to be such? Again, funny that I remember all kinds of promises from Microsoft since the 1990s which were never seen.
it is not about "why you would _want_ it" it's about why you'll _need_ to upgrade to run any new Microsoft software.
To answer why Microsoft is releasing yet another OS; it's because they didn't make Vista(yet another MS OS "written from the ground up") very efficient, portable nor scalable so Windows 7 was hacked out to solve the first problem. Hey, it's better than Vista is what I keep hearing regarding its performance. So now there's Linux still running on netbooks but not too much of a threat anymore but Apple and Google are moving into Windows territory on ARM processors. So, Windows 8 is Windows 7 made portable and supposedly able to yank it apart so it's somewhat scalable. That is if you think a quad core ARM CPU running at 1.5GHz with 2GB of RAM is low end.
thx, I didn't get to read the details yet and this explains it. In a conventional system, there's static air on the heatsink which is, static and and so it insulates. They seemed to have moved that static air boundary to the air gap between the rotating heatsink and the surface which is attached to the CPU. The air gap is so small that the friction between the air and the two surfaces moves the air and voila, no static air so no insulating air and better heat transfer. nice.
are you kidding me, do you really think that it is the money from phones that Microsoft cares about? You are VERY wrong. Microsoft has lost over $10 billion on their embedded/phone OS since Windows CE hit the market. they have lost many times that on the XBox and the same for MSN/Live Search/BING. All these 'expenses' are efforts to keep their main profit stream, Windows, streaming truckloads of cash into their pockets day in and day out. It's about controlling their destiny and accepting a few hundred million from Android OEMs is does not allow them any control of the segment and weakens Windows position. Those hundreds of millions in licensing fees are a drop in the bucket compared to the profits Windows and all the things tied to that(MS Office, MS Server, etc ) bring in.
And just as before, if the existing fees do not stem the growth of Android, they will increase the fees because it's not about income these licensing fees are purposed. IMO
Microsoft derives "value" from users of BING? With over $1 billion annually and billions before that when it was MSN Live Search, that's a funny way to figure "value". They are out paying companies now to use BING( like RIM ). "Value" is a funny term since I would put move value with a good Linux distro than I would a Windows OS.
Google does not charge $0, that is only if you want the Android OS without Google apps and Google's App Market. And to top that off, for the longest time Microsoft would charge for the OS and then turn around and kick most of that back in what they called a Marketing Program( putting a Windows sticker on the box and device, etc ).
hasn't Samsung already released product to other countries while not stating if or when the product(s) would ship to the US? And I'd heard there were complaints with the Motorola Xoom not supporting SD cards. Remember, one patent Microsoft always uses is the VFAT patent for memory devices and Motorola is also fighting back against Microsoft. It looks like the US is already getting hit because of Microsoft's misdeeds.
I believe this is some of Barnes and Nobels defense. ie they are asking more than it costs to license their entire OS stack so therefore it is an unreasonable license fee and is designed to block use of the software( Android ). Blocking can bring them back into court for anti-trust. Remember, they are associating WP7 with both Xbox and other Microsoft services and software.
no doubt many have already decided to give Microsoft the money instead of fighting them and only a very few are fighting. Too bad those fights will be dragged out for years.
the war Google is fighting is really one of protecting and expanding it's ad revenue generating space. Microsoft is out paying to get BING used as the default search( RIM, Facebook, etc ). If those companies were not out trying to block Google from selling ads they probably would not be fighting so hard to get into all those other places. Look at the phone segment. Apple did a great job on their phone but they were exclusive and expensive. so Google comes in and provides a platform for a huge segment of the market Apple was leaving out and Microsoft was floundering in.
What's really interesting here is that this is a war to block a new paradigm in software and services revenue generation. Google makes money from ad generation and they can share that with the hardware vendors. Mozilla would not be anything like it is today if it were not for the $50+ million they got annually from Google as ad revenue sharing. This scares the shit out of Microsoft, Sony, Apple, the telecoms, etc. They do not want to see their revenue streams diverting to a mechanism they do not control and they are not competent at. The whole Nortel Networks patent buy was basically the old guard blocking the new kid from building a protection wall against them. Right now, you fight patent litigation with more patent litigation but you have to have a patent pool to fight with.
I for one welcome my now overlords since the old overlords have shown they are not interesting in anything but control and locking us into and onto their products. Products which have stagnated when they have had that control. This is war, it just is not a conventional war and I think Google has to get out into those other areas only because companies like Microsoft have been documented it that they are out to put Google down. Not unlike how Bill and Steve decided Netscape must go, Microsoft has decided that Google must go. They are fighting, they have to fight because if they don't Microsoft will shut them down like they shut down Netscape. IMO
Jane you ignorant slut. What makes you think these companies want Google to license any of those patents and are not doing this just to kick them out of the phone OS market? Oh they can offer a licensing fee but the fee can also be so high it would eliminate Android from the market. And yes Jane, at least one of these companies has done this in the past.
I never said it was not foolish to disregard a warning of a threat. But no one should keep giving credibility to a company who's name is synonymous with the acronym FUD. As a business is is not smart to jump every time such a company puts out PR releases saying your stuff is a threat.
There is no such thing as independent studies when any kind of backing for the study comes from Microsoft. That company just does not have the credibility unless you just climbed out from under a rock. I'm merely the guy over on the side saying "Hey, watch out! That guy lies, he's lied before so many times I've lost count and he stands to make money if you give his claims any merit. If you want to talk about the security of WebGL you would be better off going someplace away from them." that's all I'm saying it looked like it's pretty much like what lots of others under this topic have been leading too.
of course the Kronos group is unbiased, it was their project Microsoft targeted in that "report".
and if what you're saying about OpenGL drivers is true then anything which rendered through a web connection and used the OpenGL drivers would be a problem. Has Microsoft been putting out similar "reports" about those? Java3D and JGL are the first which come to mind and any 3D application is also a "threat" to Windows.
Sorry but regardless if this being a valid issue, I have a problem with Microsoft, the marketing company, deciding when and what they want to declare as a security threat when you know darn well it's the competition which is the threat to them.
because they were so successful at growing Danger and becoming a smartphone powerhouse. My guess is this will be more like a combination of DimensionX and Visio. They've eliminated others from getting it and benefiting from its cross platform capabilities and then they'll just lock it in as a feature of Windows( desktop, phone, xbox, etc ). But people are already jumping ship, both as employees and as customers.
Slashdot Mirror
They tell him they can't identify which part(s) of their own Terms of Service have been violated and then tell the guy if he has any questions he should review their terms of service for the answers. WTF over. The term Sophomoric comes to mind.
At the very least they should have changed their ToS and then notified him of what he's violated.
LoB
Mr Rosen, is that you? Rosen Motors did this in the '90s but based their business on getting the US Big Three to buy into it. Silly boys for thinking Ford, GM, or Chrysler cared about efficiency.
LoB
Exxxxcellent. (said as I twiddle my thumbs and snicker).
www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKUOB8MN4Kc
LoB
didn't you know that Steve Ballmer is a big fan of K-LOCs and wants to see Microsoft's K-LOC count stay high, even in Linux? lol
LoB
I've been called a _hater_ a few times while trying to use logic and reasoning to explain an opposing view. Using such a label does not make you any smarter even though it may make you feel that way. It should be, Live and let live but accept change. shit happens.
LoB
not sure about the haters but regarding /. "haters" you are probably more wrong there than right. Much of what you see has _hate_ is a long running disdain for how certain companies have operated and/or are operating. Some of those actions were legal but many were not and all were not for the good of _may the better technology win_ mantra. I used to be a fan of Microsoft until I saw the first version of NT was _not_ the new desktop computer they were saying it was. Moving to the next best technology at the time, OS/2, was an eye opener regarding how far Microsoft was willing to go to make sure OS/2 did not gain a foothold. It's taken years to build the kind of disdain you see here on /. and things like the ramrodding of MS-OOXML through ISO and making a mockery of ISO show that it is still business as usual there. For others it was/is IBM, or Sony, or ______. It's not blind faith when the geek community grabs onto something and it's usually for some technical reason even if slight. When they oppose those who fight to destroy their projects or community it's far less likely to be because of fanboyism while it can look that way without knowing the history behind it all. /. does have lots of noob's who probably fall under the fanboi label but reading one or two posts from then and you should easily filter them as such.
LoB
and like the religious fanboyism, most do not really chose the _product_ but are marketed the _product_ and lock onto it use only that as the basis of their _choice_. Now, anyone with opposing views is a threat to their decision making even when they really didn't make a choice but had one put into their hand or mind. They'll even become very hypocritical defending it and not see the hypocrisy. This is also _very_ much a political thing too. More so with the US Republican party but not exclusively theirs.
I've figured it was a form of social heuristic.
LoB
more than that! Companies like Bud and Miller tell way more than 1% what they want all the time.
LoB
and adding on computer illiteracy, does this number really surprise anyone?
Don't forget, a computer illiterate customer is a happy customer and a gold mine.
LoB
is that why we're hearing ARM SoC vendors talking about quad core SoC's running at over 1.5Ghz for Windows 8?
Funny thing is, I was saying what you said in 1996 when the OS/2 Warp was released and for the 3rd time it was faster and more efficient than the previous release. 15 years later and this is a possibility with a version of Windows not yet released and promised to be such? Again, funny that I remember all kinds of promises from Microsoft since the 1990s which were never seen.
LoB
it is not about "why you would _want_ it" it's about why you'll _need_ to upgrade to run any new Microsoft software.
To answer why Microsoft is releasing yet another OS; it's because they didn't make Vista(yet another MS OS "written from the ground up") very efficient, portable nor scalable so Windows 7 was hacked out to solve the first problem. Hey, it's better than Vista is what I keep hearing regarding its performance. So now there's Linux still running on netbooks but not too much of a threat anymore but Apple and Google are moving into Windows territory on ARM processors. So, Windows 8 is Windows 7 made portable and supposedly able to yank it apart so it's somewhat scalable. That is if you think a quad core ARM CPU running at 1.5GHz with 2GB of RAM is low end.
LoB
thx, I didn't get to read the details yet and this explains it. In a conventional system, there's static air on the heatsink which is, static and and so it insulates. They seemed to have moved that static air boundary to the air gap between the rotating heatsink and the surface which is attached to the CPU. The air gap is so small that the friction between the air and the two surfaces moves the air and voila, no static air so no insulating air and better heat transfer. nice.
LoB
are you kidding me, do you really think that it is the money from phones that Microsoft cares about? You are VERY wrong. Microsoft has lost over $10 billion on their embedded/phone OS since Windows CE hit the market. they have lost many times that on the XBox and the same for MSN/Live Search/BING. All these 'expenses' are efforts to keep their main profit stream, Windows, streaming truckloads of cash into their pockets day in and day out. It's about controlling their destiny and accepting a few hundred million from Android OEMs is does not allow them any control of the segment and weakens Windows position. Those hundreds of millions in licensing fees are a drop in the bucket compared to the profits Windows and all the things tied to that(MS Office, MS Server, etc ) bring in.
And just as before, if the existing fees do not stem the growth of Android, they will increase the fees because it's not about income these licensing fees are purposed. IMO
LoB
Microsoft derives "value" from users of BING? With over $1 billion annually and billions before that when it was MSN Live Search, that's a funny way to figure "value". They are out paying companies now to use BING( like RIM ). "Value" is a funny term since I would put move value with a good Linux distro than I would a Windows OS.
Google does not charge $0, that is only if you want the Android OS without Google apps and Google's App Market. And to top that off, for the longest time Microsoft would charge for the OS and then turn around and kick most of that back in what they called a Marketing Program( putting a Windows sticker on the box and device, etc ).
LoB
hasn't Samsung already released product to other countries while not stating if or when the product(s) would ship to the US? And I'd heard there were complaints with the Motorola Xoom not supporting SD cards. Remember, one patent Microsoft always uses is the VFAT patent for memory devices and Motorola is also fighting back against Microsoft. It looks like the US is already getting hit because of Microsoft's misdeeds.
LoB
I believe this is some of Barnes and Nobels defense. ie they are asking more than it costs to license their entire OS stack so therefore it is an unreasonable license fee and is designed to block use of the software( Android ). Blocking can bring them back into court for anti-trust. Remember, they are associating WP7 with both Xbox and other Microsoft services and software.
no doubt many have already decided to give Microsoft the money instead of fighting them and only a very few are fighting. Too bad those fights will be dragged out for years.
LoB
the war Google is fighting is really one of protecting and expanding it's ad revenue generating space. Microsoft is out paying to get BING used as the default search( RIM, Facebook, etc ). If those companies were not out trying to block Google from selling ads they probably would not be fighting so hard to get into all those other places. Look at the phone segment. Apple did a great job on their phone but they were exclusive and expensive. so Google comes in and provides a platform for a huge segment of the market Apple was leaving out and Microsoft was floundering in.
What's really interesting here is that this is a war to block a new paradigm in software and services revenue generation. Google makes money from ad generation and they can share that with the hardware vendors. Mozilla would not be anything like it is today if it were not for the $50+ million they got annually from Google as ad revenue sharing. This scares the shit out of Microsoft, Sony, Apple, the telecoms, etc. They do not want to see their revenue streams diverting to a mechanism they do not control and they are not competent at. The whole Nortel Networks patent buy was basically the old guard blocking the new kid from building a protection wall against them. Right now, you fight patent litigation with more patent litigation but you have to have a patent pool to fight with.
I for one welcome my now overlords since the old overlords have shown they are not interesting in anything but control and locking us into and onto their products. Products which have stagnated when they have had that control. This is war, it just is not a conventional war and I think Google has to get out into those other areas only because companies like Microsoft have been documented it that they are out to put Google down. Not unlike how Bill and Steve decided Netscape must go, Microsoft has decided that Google must go. They are fighting, they have to fight because if they don't Microsoft will shut them down like they shut down Netscape. IMO
LoB
Jane you ignorant slut. What makes you think these companies want Google to license any of those patents and are not doing this just to kick them out of the phone OS market? Oh they can offer a licensing fee but the fee can also be so high it would eliminate Android from the market. And yes Jane, at least one of these companies has done this in the past.
LoB
not likely. He told the Judge it was his Xbox because he really liked his PS3 and didn't want to lose that.
LoB
I think someone needs some simulated humor.
LoB
the problem is that NASA does not want anyone triggering the growth of their own black monoliths since learning that they only grow from moon dust.
LoB
I never said it was not foolish to disregard a warning of a threat. But no one should keep giving credibility to a company who's name is synonymous with the acronym FUD. As a business is is not smart to jump every time such a company puts out PR releases saying your stuff is a threat.
There is no such thing as independent studies when any kind of backing for the study comes from Microsoft. That company just does not have the credibility unless you just climbed out from under a rock. I'm merely the guy over on the side saying "Hey, watch out! That guy lies, he's lied before so many times I've lost count and he stands to make money if you give his claims any merit. If you want to talk about the security of WebGL you would be better off going someplace away from them." that's all I'm saying it looked like it's pretty much like what lots of others under this topic have been leading too.
LoB
of course the Kronos group is unbiased, it was their project Microsoft targeted in that "report".
and if what you're saying about OpenGL drivers is true then anything which rendered through a web connection and used the OpenGL drivers would be a problem. Has Microsoft been putting out similar "reports" about those? Java3D and JGL are the first which come to mind and any 3D application is also a "threat" to Windows.
Sorry but regardless if this being a valid issue, I have a problem with Microsoft, the marketing company, deciding when and what they want to declare as a security threat when you know darn well it's the competition which is the threat to them.
LoB
because they were so successful at growing Danger and becoming a smartphone powerhouse. My guess is this will be more like a combination of DimensionX and Visio. They've eliminated others from getting it and benefiting from its cross platform capabilities and then they'll just lock it in as a feature of Windows( desktop, phone, xbox, etc ). But people are already jumping ship, both as employees and as customers.
LoB
ah, right. what about CHCS by SAIC and written in Mumps. It's amazing what stuff you find in the cracks when you look around. thx
LoB