oh, that's right, you don't "do" open source and you want your customers to stop using that product even if it works well for them on the computers they're already running. I see now, never mind.
Apple is making big mistakes in their handling of the iPhone software. Years ago, Palm created a handheld computer which expanded at an incredible speed because Palm stayed neutral on both hardware accessories and software add-ons. Thousands of software applications sprung up which extended the device to all kinds of valuable uses and the same went for the hardware accessories. That changed over a short period of time as the company changed hands and keep changing the hardware and software platform and effectively removed the 3rd party ecosystem which made the device so widely used. There was help from Microsoft paying vendors to use their Windows CE based software but that's another story.
Now, we see Apple doing much of the same although not really changing to do it. Apple has always held their hardware and software close but on the desktop, they were open enough to allow other vendor's software to work in any way they deemed fit. But with the iPhone, they are showing how much control they insist on having and exerting to keep the device as a platform for Apple products and keep the device tied to Apple partners. As they keep showing this is an imprisoned device, the 3rd party software vendors may very well start looking for more open platforms. We've already seen that Microsoft is finally declaring WindowsCE/PocketPC a failure and plans to move to a Windows 7 base but you know that is not going to be viable for a number of years. Android looks like it has the potential to snap up any iPhone ISV's who are getting tired of the tight control of what gets accepted and what does not. After only one year and with the iPhone already hitting its stride, the marketshare numbers for Android still need to improve to make the jump easy. As long as Apple keeps sliding down this slimmy slope of dicatatorship on the device, they'll probably start losing one large feature of the device and that is 3rd party apps. IMO.
this sounds like something which might have been used in any one of the DARPA Grand Challenge vehicles and we know a good number of those were open source and a few were even Linux based. So, maybe Ford got the basic ideas, design and code from there and tweaked it to work on the highway.
It is pleasing to see them publishing that it came from an open source design.
that Microsoft Linux Lab is just a training facility for Microsoft upper management so they can be exposed to what open source is and so they can then be moved into other positions within Microsoft and use what was learned to advance Microsoft Windows or at the very least, protect its position. It's not about making money of open source, it's about understanding it and the people behind it. They go to open source conventions, not to sell Microsoft open source products but to see what others are doing and talk to them to learn their strengths and their weaknesses. They join open standards bodies not to move open standards forward but to move them in directions which leave holes open for Microsoft to leverage and to slow down or distract the committees while Microsoft embeds similar technologies into Windows or their other desktop or server apps.
Do pay any attention to the man behind the curtain. Microsoft's Linux Lab is a travesty. It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham. And then some. IMO
true, but then they wouldn't be on the up-and-up and would have to block the posting of cross-platform projects. If they didn't block cross platform project, wouldn't their site be just another site like sourceforge which allows any and all open source projects?
So they would have to have a plan to _steer_ projects to Windows-only APIs like those found in MS.Net. It could be this is what they are doing and it could be part of their plan to try and replace WindowsCE/Windows Mobile with Windows 7 two years from now. Everyone now has their own App-Store so this could be the basis for where they plan to fund and foster nice little Windows 7 apps and applet projects.
I can see this and although it's not really open, Microsoft has their own definition for open and open source.
and you think they would not benefit from knowing how to touch-type? Should future writers also poke out books at slower speeds and coders bang out code at a slower rate because it was done that way in the past?
That's what I'm saying, the tool is there, there are skills which greatly improve data entry rates and allow the brain to spend more time doing other things while the fingers all plow out the letters.
I would want to read the fine print, read between the lines, ask 4 lawyers and then maybe think about putting anything on their site.
I also have to ask, just what do they gain from this _if_ they are completely on the up-and-up with this? Is it advertising or is it that they get to see/measure projects activity so they'll know where to put more marketing dollars to fight it? Or maybe keep and eye on what's active and they should buy up and shut down? Is it just advertising dollars? I really doubt it's about ad dollars because they had better know that the developer community is smaller than the general online population so they'd be targeting a much smaller piece of pie and a piece of pie they have gone to great lengths( sometimes even illegal ones ) to keep control of.
There is no _new Microsoft_ so what really is their motive here and what can they do with this to continue their fight to stop open source software growth and along with it, the GNU/Linux open source projects?
an management likes not have to make a choice. How else can it be explained that they are willing to get locked into a single vendor which in contract licensing requires products be used and tied into. Wow, I had no idea that businesses were suckers for that kind of forced lockin but it explains alot of what I've seen when offering non-Microsoft solutions. Nobody would say they could not use a non-Microsoft solution, they just kept saying they are a Microsoft shop. Now I know that "we are a Microsoft shop" mean "we are not allowed to use anything but Microsoft products".
It sure sounds like something a convicted monopoly shouldn't be doing or allowed to be doing but if business people are that stupid, using laws to protect them isn't going to help them from themselves.
and all this talk related to coding makes me think of the documenting code or the lack of. I know that often gets brought up in coding circles/meetings. To each his/she own but there just might be a connection here.
I never said it was but using the computer by typing letters into it is the main form of data entry for developers. If they don't know this and won't learn to use the tool efficiently when it is what they do for a living, why would you expect them to learn other aspects of the trade? They seem to not think that efficient data entry is important.
All that other stuff is very important but why do you people think that a simple skill such as touch-typing is not important and not something students should be taught? I can crawl to the car but I walk because it is an efficient way to get the task done. Seriously, why is it not important to learn how to type efficiently? Because you can do it with one finger, a toe, a pencil, or a hammer is not an answer.
I guess we just live in a world where people are happy with close enough, good enough. FYI, good enough always gets replaced by done well eventually.
the point is that people are not bothering to learn a simple skill of using the tool which they are being paid to use every day. The point is not that it can't be used using crude poking gestures with 1 or more fingers and having to look at where the poking is occurring.
No, it's not a national emergency but who said it was and why does anything have to be a national emergency to be a good idea?
So you get by using crude methods of typing on a computer keyboard, good for you. Because almost every business I've seen uses a computer and hires people to use those computers, it should be expected that those people know how to efficiently enter data and yes, I'd also consider how well a person typed along with their general skills on the computer besides just their knowledge of the job they are hired for. I don't want anyone who's going to be using a pencil to type or one or two fingers. They obviously don't think it is important enough to know efficient use of the tool so why would they be expected to put much effort into expanding their skills elsewhere.
And I know there are alot of coders who don't know how to type using more than a few digits. I've seen way too many as it is. But it should be taught in school and be required. It could easily be a combined typing and intro to computers class. Give em a liveCD which boots right into TuxTyping so they can play on their own if they want or need to because they will be required to use a computer and using it effectively is going to make it easier for them in the long run. They can get by without this but I will tell you this, those people who I try to work with who don't type well, do not want to learn or use the computer very much. It is painful for them and awkward and it is because they are not effective in entering data. If they can't click on everything, they just don't want any part of it.
so you're saying that typing is not a big part of doing software development? I've not really seen speech recognition work very well for development but maybe you have some other way of getting the code into the computer. Yes that was a wise-ass comment and it's because I said it was a big part of getting the job done, not the only part.
In my opinion, if someones who's job is to get data into a computer by using the keyboard is not willing to learn one of the most efficient ways of doing it, which is using all his/her fingers, then why would you expect them to learn other aspects of the trade?
At the time I learned touch-typing, I didn't even know I was going to college but knew that I would need to use a typewriter at some point. I still have that old Sears typewriter I bought a year or two out of high school.
Sure you can get by using hunt/peck typing but when it is your job to use a particular tool, learning to use the tool well should be considered as an indicator of the applicants motivations. IMO.
I'm stunned that it isn't required already. I took typing and even did it with a broken finger taped to a popsicle stick but it was one of the best courses I took. It is agonizing to watch someone poking their fingers on a keyboard with their hands moving all over the place and their eyes looking down and up and down and up. So much wasted effort and time and at the same time, businesses let people get away with this too. I've seen developers who can't touch-type and that is pathetic when such a skill means so much to getting the job done. Would you hire a mechanic who used a wrench for a hammer and screwdriver as a chisel? But, it's allowed, it's accepted, and as we have been made aware in this thread, touch-typing is an after thought in our school system so it's unlikely to change.
When is Windows not like Windows? When Microsoft ships a new version.
When is Windows just like Windows? When Microsoft ships a new version.
You all know that Windows 7 is not like any kind of Windows most people are running but as you should have seen if you RTFA, Microsoft's army of marketing droids still likes to tell people that it's Windows so you know it.
Besides this telling the world+dog that Microsoft is fighting Linux, look at the first mention of netbooks and Linux. The page title is about netbooks but the bullets are on PCs. They are being real careful to not allow the netbook to be labeled a special device or market segment and want it to be considered a limited function PC. The reason why is because if people think of the netbook as another device like say, an iPhone, they know that all the smoke and mirror tricks claiming having Windows is better goes out the windows. Peg the netbook as a little computer and people will think that having Windows on it is a good thing to do and if you put anything else on it, you'll have less functionality. The reality is, these resource constrained devices do more with Linux because Linux and OSS does better and can do more in these small devices. Think about it, you don't see Window XP, Vista, or Windows 7 on smartphones or MIDs devices.
but when you have companies like Microsoft funding university research which contain strings requiring them to use Microsoft tools and platform, limits exist. Maybe there are fewer unrestricted investments being made. Thinking of how the OLPC project went, maybe there are too many business interests who pounce on new projects to stall them so they don't become a threat? We know from court documents that most of what comes out of Microsoft is specifically designed to offset a threat so motivation becomes mediocre once that threat is curtailed. For instance, DirectX/3D was created to offset the threat of OpenGL in the early 90s. Windows CE to offset the threat of the PalmOS in the mid 90s. Internet Explorer to offset the threat of Netscape Navigator in the late 90s. Microsoft.NET to offset the threat of Java, Xbox to offset Sony PlayStation. I don't think you really see much innovation going on in any of these areas once they get the results they wanted. For one, they don't need to be profitable in any of those areas as long as have keep getting billions in profits from Windows every year.
Look at GM also, they put together a team which built a pretty nice EV in the 90s called the EV1 but after the oil industry took over the office of the Presidency in 2001, they dismantled and destroyed that technology and even sold the patent rights to the battery technology used in that car to the oil industry. In the early 2000s they publicly declared that hybrids and EVs were bad for the consumers and that hydrogen was the future. All the while, they ere taking billions from the US government/oil industry to spend on hydrogen vaporware and marketing.
Making stuff cheaper once it's on the market has always been part of every businesses when there is a competitive force available to pressure efficiency on them to continue being profitable. When those pressures are removed the drive to better, faster, cheaper goes out the window.
The patent issue is getting pretty bad also but it's more of a recent thing. Companies like Microsoft didn't worry about patents in the 80s and 90s because they know that when they took away the patent owners income, there'd be little left after the long court battle to fight with. Then, paying out a hundred million or less to the shell company remaining was cheap compared to letting someone else have any kind of ownership or control over Microsoft and the developers it needs to maintain their market position. I'm thinking of Wang for example.
what about all that money flying around in the late 90s and early 00s? Oh, that's right, lots of the dotcom money went to fake businesses and any business with a.com name. Then, in the 2000s, all the wealth went into real estate( real ?), the banking sector, and investment funds made up of shotty loans to anyone breathing.
I think the problem is that way too many just want a fast buck and so the wealth gets wasted on gimmicks trying to make more money from nothing with a result of nothing gained for science or society. I still know people who are Day Traders, it's what they do for a "living".
And don't get me started on how many big companies keep swallowing smaller successful companies only to end up destroying them because of what's known from "The Innovators Dilemma" as disruptive and therefore a threat. Or they destroy the innovators to protect their position in the market and yes, I'm talking about companies like Microsoft, the US auto industry, US Oil industry, etc. And I know a couple of business owners who said that they are doing what they are doing to sell the business and not because they believe in what they are doing, it's purely financial. All these kinds of things kill off new products, new systems, and slow progress so that the existing behemoths can keep doing their old ways of money making. And sometimes, they remove reward from those who attempt to innovate and thus all but eliminate their ability to innovate again. Notice how guys like Dean Caman keep on coming up with new ideas because he was rewarded for an earlier invention. Had he not been successful at obtaining that reward, I doubt he would have had the funds to build something like the Segway and those balancing wheelchair systems which can go up stairs or any of the other inventions he's had since his infusion system.
but Google does not control the Internet and Microsoft controls the desktop OS and controls the OEM to some extent. Google has big bucks but Microsoft is the gate keeper with big bucks. We're already seen companies give up control and their own profits to take profits from Microsoft via marketing kick-backs. I don't know if Google has the history to get companies to feel so good about these kinds of deals that they'll go with Google over Microsoft.
Didn't we also hear the Thai manufacturing consortium head say they fear Microsoft?
that is how it is done and having any kind of monopoly has no restriction on doing this, or so it seems since Microsoft does this over and over again. The retail stores are the same, they get paid by vendors for placing product and paid for shelf space. The idea that the customer makes choices is long gone here in the US. The only exception is the very small fraction of the population which are considered trend setters and do the work finding what they really want or remaking products into that fits their needs.
What I would like to see is to see someone pull a Microsoft and purchase more of Microsoft's software off of devices so more people get a chance to try something else.
Microsoft will start paying companies to keep IE just like they paid people to put IE on computers in the Netscape days. They paid vendors to put XP on netbooks when Linux was the only OS used so it's just a matter of time. And watch for the studies stating 4x the hassles when using Chrome over IE.
From that I'd read, Maemo apps are generally written in Python so this was pretty much a requirement if Nokia really wanted to migrate Maemo from gtk+ to Qt. It is sad that both sides could not work out something. On one side is a commercial interest to allow proprietary code to run on the platform and most likely on the other side is desire to keep things open source. Both camps will exist for a long time to come and these kinds of fractures aren't good for either side.
Could it be that the last few seconds of data shows no sign of altitude loss and rapid deceleration? Maybe it ran into a rather large, mostly colorless, and smooth monolith.
No! No! No! Microsoft has been all about limiting what choice people have and they are starting to hurt and pumping up the efforts to hurt Google. As a matter of fact, their #1 business method is block choice so that Windows and Microsoft software is the only choice.
To this day I'm still learning from old court documents or from former Microsoft employees how time after time direction and policies at Microsoft are all about protecting the monopoly and any side effect of customers getting feature x, y, or z is just that, a side effect of anti-competitive goals.
Google had better be ready for the nastiness which is Microsoft. They will have to do things which may look like they are the bastards or else Microsoft will be stomping on their bloody corpse like so many others who got in their way of owning control of all computer software. IMO
hmmm, let's see, what's the level of mental activity of someone playing basketball compared to someone sitting at McDonald's eating BigMacs?
Are you saying that overweight people tend to have a high level of mental activity in their seditary lives? As much or more so than those who are out burning calories, keeping blood flow high, and having "stuff" moving around in front of them and during all of this many different parts of the brain are involved? I guess I missed that and will have to keep my eyes open to catch all that stuff going on with those people sitting around out there.
Slashdot Mirror
oh, that's right, you don't "do" open source and you want your customers to stop using that product even if it works well for them on the computers they're already running. I see now, never mind.
LoB
Apple is making big mistakes in their handling of the iPhone software. Years ago, Palm created a handheld computer which expanded at an incredible speed because Palm stayed neutral on both hardware accessories and software add-ons. Thousands of software applications sprung up which extended the device to all kinds of valuable uses and the same went for the hardware accessories. That changed over a short period of time as the company changed hands and keep changing the hardware and software platform and effectively removed the 3rd party ecosystem which made the device so widely used. There was help from Microsoft paying vendors to use their Windows CE based software but that's another story.
Now, we see Apple doing much of the same although not really changing to do it. Apple has always held their hardware and software close but on the desktop, they were open enough to allow other vendor's software to work in any way they deemed fit. But with the iPhone, they are showing how much control they insist on having and exerting to keep the device as a platform for Apple products and keep the device tied to Apple partners. As they keep showing this is an imprisoned device, the 3rd party software vendors may very well start looking for more open platforms. We've already seen that Microsoft is finally declaring WindowsCE/PocketPC a failure and plans to move to a Windows 7 base but you know that is not going to be viable for a number of years. Android looks like it has the potential to snap up any iPhone ISV's who are getting tired of the tight control of what gets accepted and what does not. After only one year and with the iPhone already hitting its stride, the marketshare numbers for Android still need to improve to make the jump easy. As long as Apple keeps sliding down this slimmy slope of dicatatorship on the device, they'll probably start losing one large feature of the device and that is 3rd party apps. IMO.
LoB
this sounds like something which might have been used in any one of the DARPA Grand Challenge vehicles and we know a good number of those were open source and a few were even Linux based. So, maybe Ford got the basic ideas, design and code from there and tweaked it to work on the highway.
It is pleasing to see them publishing that it came from an open source design.
LoB
that Microsoft Linux Lab is just a training facility for Microsoft upper management so they can be exposed to what open source is and so they can then be moved into other positions within Microsoft and use what was learned to advance Microsoft Windows or at the very least, protect its position. It's not about making money of open source, it's about understanding it and the people behind it. They go to open source conventions, not to sell Microsoft open source products but to see what others are doing and talk to them to learn their strengths and their weaknesses. They join open standards bodies not to move open standards forward but to move them in directions which leave holes open for Microsoft to leverage and to slow down or distract the committees while Microsoft embeds similar technologies into Windows or their other desktop or server apps.
Do pay any attention to the man behind the curtain. Microsoft's Linux Lab is a travesty. It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham. And then some. IMO
LoB
true, but then they wouldn't be on the up-and-up and would have to block the posting of cross-platform projects. If they didn't block cross platform project, wouldn't their site be just another site like sourceforge which allows any and all open source projects?
.Net. It could be this is what they are doing and it could be part of their plan to try and replace WindowsCE/Windows Mobile with Windows 7 two years from now. Everyone now has their own App-Store so this could be the basis for where they plan to fund and foster nice little Windows 7 apps and applet projects.
So they would have to have a plan to _steer_ projects to Windows-only APIs like those found in MS
I can see this and although it's not really open, Microsoft has their own definition for open and open source.
LoB
and you think they would not benefit from knowing how to touch-type? Should future writers also poke out books at slower speeds and coders bang out code at a slower rate because it was done that way in the past?
That's what I'm saying, the tool is there, there are skills which greatly improve data entry rates and allow the brain to spend more time doing other things while the fingers all plow out the letters.
LoB
I would want to read the fine print, read between the lines, ask 4 lawyers and then maybe think about putting anything on their site.
I also have to ask, just what do they gain from this _if_ they are completely on the up-and-up with this? Is it advertising or is it that they get to see/measure projects activity so they'll know where to put more marketing dollars to fight it? Or maybe keep and eye on what's active and they should buy up and shut down? Is it just advertising dollars? I really doubt it's about ad dollars because they had better know that the developer community is smaller than the general online population so they'd be targeting a much smaller piece of pie and a piece of pie they have gone to great lengths( sometimes even illegal ones ) to keep control of.
There is no _new Microsoft_ so what really is their motive here and what can they do with this to continue their fight to stop open source software growth and along with it, the GNU/Linux open source projects?
LoB
an management likes not have to make a choice. How else can it be explained that they are willing to get locked into a single vendor which in contract licensing requires products be used and tied into. Wow, I had no idea that businesses were suckers for that kind of forced lockin but it explains alot of what I've seen when offering non-Microsoft solutions. Nobody would say they could not use a non-Microsoft solution, they just kept saying they are a Microsoft shop. Now I know that "we are a Microsoft shop" mean "we are not allowed to use anything but Microsoft products".
It sure sounds like something a convicted monopoly shouldn't be doing or allowed to be doing but if business people are that stupid, using laws to protect them isn't going to help them from themselves.
LoB
no worries, the meaning was understood but then again, I'm not a compiler. ;-)
LoB
and all this talk related to coding makes me think of the documenting code or the lack of. I know that often gets brought up in coding circles/meetings. To each his/she own but there just might be a connection here.
LoB
I never said it was but using the computer by typing letters into it is the main form of data entry for developers. If they don't know this and won't learn to use the tool efficiently when it is what they do for a living, why would you expect them to learn other aspects of the trade? They seem to not think that efficient data entry is important.
All that other stuff is very important but why do you people think that a simple skill such as touch-typing is not important and not something students should be taught? I can crawl to the car but I walk because it is an efficient way to get the task done. Seriously, why is it not important to learn how to type efficiently? Because you can do it with one finger, a toe, a pencil, or a hammer is not an answer.
I guess we just live in a world where people are happy with close enough, good enough. FYI, good enough always gets replaced by done well eventually.
LoB
the point is that people are not bothering to learn a simple skill of using the tool which they are being paid to use every day. The point is not that it can't be used using crude poking gestures with 1 or more fingers and having to look at where the poking is occurring.
No, it's not a national emergency but who said it was and why does anything have to be a national emergency to be a good idea?
So you get by using crude methods of typing on a computer keyboard, good for you. Because almost every business I've seen uses a computer and hires people to use those computers, it should be expected that those people know how to efficiently enter data and yes, I'd also consider how well a person typed along with their general skills on the computer besides just their knowledge of the job they are hired for. I don't want anyone who's going to be using a pencil to type or one or two fingers. They obviously don't think it is important enough to know efficient use of the tool so why would they be expected to put much effort into expanding their skills elsewhere.
And I know there are alot of coders who don't know how to type using more than a few digits. I've seen way too many as it is. But it should be taught in school and be required. It could easily be a combined typing and intro to computers class. Give em a liveCD which boots right into TuxTyping so they can play on their own if they want or need to because they will be required to use a computer and using it effectively is going to make it easier for them in the long run. They can get by without this but I will tell you this, those people who I try to work with who don't type well, do not want to learn or use the computer very much. It is painful for them and awkward and it is because they are not effective in entering data. If they can't click on everything, they just don't want any part of it.
LoB
so you're saying that typing is not a big part of doing software development? I've not really seen speech recognition work very well for development but maybe you have some other way of getting the code into the computer. Yes that was a wise-ass comment and it's because I said it was a big part of getting the job done, not the only part.
In my opinion, if someones who's job is to get data into a computer by using the keyboard is not willing to learn one of the most efficient ways of doing it, which is using all his/her fingers, then why would you expect them to learn other aspects of the trade?
At the time I learned touch-typing, I didn't even know I was going to college but knew that I would need to use a typewriter at some point. I still have that old Sears typewriter I bought a year or two out of high school.
Sure you can get by using hunt/peck typing but when it is your job to use a particular tool, learning to use the tool well should be considered as an indicator of the applicants motivations. IMO.
LoB
I'm stunned that it isn't required already. I took typing and even did it with a broken finger taped to a popsicle stick but it was one of the best courses I took. It is agonizing to watch someone poking their fingers on a keyboard with their hands moving all over the place and their eyes looking down and up and down and up. So much wasted effort and time and at the same time, businesses let people get away with this too. I've seen developers who can't touch-type and that is pathetic when such a skill means so much to getting the job done. Would you hire a mechanic who used a wrench for a hammer and screwdriver as a chisel? But, it's allowed, it's accepted, and as we have been made aware in this thread, touch-typing is an after thought in our school system so it's unlikely to change.
LoB
ding, ding, ding we have a winner!
LoB
When is Windows not like Windows?
When Microsoft ships a new version.
When is Windows just like Windows?
When Microsoft ships a new version.
You all know that Windows 7 is not like any kind of Windows most people are running but as you should have seen if you RTFA, Microsoft's army of marketing droids still likes to tell people that it's Windows so you know it.
Besides this telling the world+dog that Microsoft is fighting Linux, look at the first mention of netbooks and Linux. The page title is about netbooks but the bullets are on PCs. They are being real careful to not allow the netbook to be labeled a special device or market segment and want it to be considered a limited function PC. The reason why is because if people think of the netbook as another device like say, an iPhone, they know that all the smoke and mirror tricks claiming having Windows is better goes out the windows. Peg the netbook as a little computer and people will think that having Windows on it is a good thing to do and if you put anything else on it, you'll have less functionality. The reality is, these resource constrained devices do more with Linux because Linux and OSS does better and can do more in these small devices. Think about it, you don't see Window XP, Vista, or Windows 7 on smartphones or MIDs devices.
LoB
but when you have companies like Microsoft funding university research which contain strings requiring them to use Microsoft tools and platform, limits exist. Maybe there are fewer unrestricted investments being made. Thinking of how the OLPC project went, maybe there are too many business interests who pounce on new projects to stall them so they don't become a threat? We know from court documents that most of what comes out of Microsoft is specifically designed to offset a threat so motivation becomes mediocre once that threat is curtailed. For instance, DirectX/3D was created to offset the threat of OpenGL in the early 90s. Windows CE to offset the threat of the PalmOS in the mid 90s. Internet Explorer to offset the threat of Netscape Navigator in the late 90s. Microsoft .NET to offset the threat of Java, Xbox to offset Sony PlayStation. I don't think you really see much innovation going on in any of these areas once they get the results they wanted. For one, they don't need to be profitable in any of those areas as long as have keep getting billions in profits from Windows every year.
Look at GM also, they put together a team which built a pretty nice EV in the 90s called the EV1 but after the oil industry took over the office of the Presidency in 2001, they dismantled and destroyed that technology and even sold the patent rights to the battery technology used in that car to the oil industry. In the early 2000s they publicly declared that hybrids and EVs were bad for the consumers and that hydrogen was the future. All the while, they ere taking billions from the US government/oil industry to spend on hydrogen vaporware and marketing.
Making stuff cheaper once it's on the market has always been part of every businesses when there is a competitive force available to pressure efficiency on them to continue being profitable. When those pressures are removed the drive to better, faster, cheaper goes out the window.
The patent issue is getting pretty bad also but it's more of a recent thing. Companies like Microsoft didn't worry about patents in the 80s and 90s because they know that when they took away the patent owners income, there'd be little left after the long court battle to fight with. Then, paying out a hundred million or less to the shell company remaining was cheap compared to letting someone else have any kind of ownership or control over Microsoft and the developers it needs to maintain their market position. I'm thinking of Wang for example.
LoB
what about all that money flying around in the late 90s and early 00s? Oh, that's right, lots of the dotcom money went to fake businesses and any business with a .com name. Then, in the 2000s, all the wealth went into real estate( real ?), the banking sector, and investment funds made up of shotty loans to anyone breathing.
I think the problem is that way too many just want a fast buck and so the wealth gets wasted on gimmicks trying to make more money from nothing with a result of nothing gained for science or society. I still know people who are Day Traders, it's what they do for a "living".
And don't get me started on how many big companies keep swallowing smaller successful companies only to end up destroying them because of what's known from "The Innovators Dilemma" as disruptive and therefore a threat. Or they destroy the innovators to protect their position in the market and yes, I'm talking about companies like Microsoft, the US auto industry, US Oil industry, etc. And I know a couple of business owners who said that they are doing what they are doing to sell the business and not because they believe in what they are doing, it's purely financial. All these kinds of things kill off new products, new systems, and slow progress so that the existing behemoths can keep doing their old ways of money making. And sometimes, they remove reward from those who attempt to innovate and thus all but eliminate their ability to innovate again. Notice how guys like Dean Caman keep on coming up with new ideas because he was rewarded for an earlier invention. Had he not been successful at obtaining that reward, I doubt he would have had the funds to build something like the Segway and those balancing wheelchair systems which can go up stairs or any of the other inventions he's had since his infusion system.
Protectionism sucks the life out of progress. IMO
LoB
but Google does not control the Internet and Microsoft controls the desktop OS and controls the OEM to some extent. Google has big bucks but Microsoft is the gate keeper with big bucks. We're already seen companies give up control and their own profits to take profits from Microsoft via marketing kick-backs. I don't know if Google has the history to get companies to feel so good about these kinds of deals that they'll go with Google over Microsoft.
Didn't we also hear the Thai manufacturing consortium head say they fear Microsoft?
The fight is on, that's for sure.
LoB
that is how it is done and having any kind of monopoly has no restriction on doing this, or so it seems since Microsoft does this over and over again. The retail stores are the same, they get paid by vendors for placing product and paid for shelf space. The idea that the customer makes choices is long gone here in the US. The only exception is the very small fraction of the population which are considered trend setters and do the work finding what they really want or remaking products into that fits their needs.
What I would like to see is to see someone pull a Microsoft and purchase more of Microsoft's software off of devices so more people get a chance to try something else.
LoB
Microsoft will start paying companies to keep IE just like they paid people to put IE on computers in the Netscape days. They paid vendors to put XP on netbooks when Linux was the only OS used so it's just a matter of time. And watch for the studies stating 4x the hassles when using Chrome over IE.
LoB
From that I'd read, Maemo apps are generally written in Python so this was pretty much a requirement if Nokia really wanted to migrate Maemo from gtk+ to Qt. It is sad that both sides could not work out something. On one side is a commercial interest to allow proprietary code to run on the platform and most likely on the other side is desire to keep things open source. Both camps will exist for a long time to come and these kinds of fractures aren't good for either side.
LoB
Could it be that the last few seconds of data shows no sign of altitude loss and rapid deceleration?
Maybe it ran into a rather large, mostly colorless, and smooth monolith.
LoB
No! No! No! Microsoft has been all about limiting what choice people have and they are starting to hurt and pumping up the efforts to hurt Google. As a matter of fact, their #1 business method is block choice so that Windows and Microsoft software is the only choice.
To this day I'm still learning from old court documents or from former Microsoft employees how time after time direction and policies at Microsoft are all about protecting the monopoly and any side effect of customers getting feature x, y, or z is just that, a side effect of anti-competitive goals.
Google had better be ready for the nastiness which is Microsoft. They will have to do things which may look like they are the bastards or else Microsoft will be stomping on their bloody corpse like so many others who got in their way of owning control of all computer software. IMO
LoB
hmmm, let's see, what's the level of mental activity of someone playing basketball compared to someone sitting at McDonald's eating BigMacs?
Are you saying that overweight people tend to have a high level of mental activity in their seditary lives? As much or more so than those who are out burning calories, keeping blood flow high, and having "stuff" moving around in front of them and during all of this many different parts of the brain are involved? I guess I missed that and will have to keep my eyes open to catch all that stuff going on with those people sitting around out there.
LoB