And your point is...? I don't recall it being illegal to sell below your cost.
While simply selling below cost is not a problem in itself, selling below cost in order to drive out competition is predatory pricing which violates the Sherman Antitrust Act. That's my point.
Whether or not this is true in this case is up to the courts to decide, but it appears that predatory pricing is what Rambus is accusing Micron and the manufacturers of.
Poor wording on my part. Wal*Mart is just following the lead of other mega-corporations before it. I used them as an example because they are the most notorious company that uses the tactic today. And, yes, they do sell below cost; it's been demonstrated in court.
'We want DDR to explode in the marketplace so have actually been requesting Infineon, Samsung, and Hynix to lower their DDR pricing to help it become a standard (and drive Rambus away completely).'
They're claiming that DDR manufacturers colluded to reduce prices, thereby taking a temporary hit in profit while driving Rambus out of business. All in the interest of future profits. Thank Wal*Mart for the idea.
In time. When Vista is released, for an overwhelming majority of users, it will matter.
No, it won't.
When Vista ships, everyone will be me, unless people go out and buy new computers specifically for Vista.
They will, or more appropriately they won't upgrade to Vista until they buy a new computer.
The majority of users don't buy all new hardware when a new OS comes out.
You are correct. The majority of users keep using the factory-installed OS until they buy a new computer regardless of new releases.
But... they are doing that. Vista is supposed to run with XP (and 2000) drivers.
Really? Then why is MS distributing this paper to XP driver writers about backward compatability issues? If you have evidence that MS has indicated that all XP drivers are supported then please enlighten me. Even if they have said so the cited paper (directed to driver developers) leaves some ambiguity.
You're a little... um... pessimistic about hardware providers.
Yes I am.
Most large providers do care about their customers...
Most large provider's customers are HP, Dell, Gateway, etc., not you and I.
It's the small vendors who typically don't.
If there's one person championing the openness of drivers it's Theo de Raadt, and he thinks otherwise.
Does Lenovo ship preconfigured versions of future operating system revisions when they come out for older hardware? I don't think they do...
You missed the point. I never said that they did this for older hardware; I said that for an overwhelming majority of users, it doesn't matter.
...but I'm concerned with how my current hardware will work. I stopped chasing the bleeding edge years ago.
Then Microsoft doesn't care about you. Any attempt that MS makes toward making an "upgrade" version of Vista will be an afterthought. They don't make enough money on it to really care. Sorry that you're not part of a significant market; Isn't capitalism grand? As far as "bleeding edge" goes, by the time Vista ships you won't need "bleeding edge", you'll just need "new."
Now, that means that Microsoft now has a responsibility to make sure that when they change the driver model, they either maintain driver compatibility, or make sure all the vendors have new drivers.
No it doesn't. It means that they can't change the driver model while simultaneously stating that their new operating system will run on any existing system that has drivers for the old model. They are very clearly not doing this. Nothing in XP will break because Vista is released.
the vendor is at fault in Linux's case, and Microsoft is at fault in Microsoft's case
It's the vendor's fault in both cases and the vendor doesn't care in either case. Most large vendors don't give a rat's ass about Linux because the market is too small for them. They don't give a rat's ass about supporting the crap you already bought on a new Windows platform (unless they're still selling the same crap). If you're not buying new gear, they don't care about you.
This is where the small vendors can come in and make a little extra money by putting forth the effort to at least provide specs for non-Windows developers to use. Good for them.
Not only is it beta, but by the time it ships, users won't have to look for drivers, Lenovo will have it preconfigured already. So his biggest gripe is a complete non-issue for the overwhelming majority of computer users. Sounds like a thumbs-up to me.
BTW, isn't the Slashdot mentality great? Poor driver support for Linux: "Broadcom/ATI/whoever Is The Devil." Poor driver support for Windows: "Vista Beta 2 has Major Problems." Go Figure.
Oxfam does this. But if you actually gave a shit you'd know this already instead of blindly bashing the $100 laptop project. After all there's more than one way to try to help others and nobody is forcing you to do it their way.
I don't know what she wore, but she listens to the Beatles and Rolling Stones on her iPod. I don't know about you, but I'm going to vote for the candidate that likes to "shake things up."
Oh, please. Next you'll be telling us that IE is created by humans in exchamge for money, instead of being magically emitted from Bill Gates' ass. Enough of your lies!
The VPN 3000 can be configured to leave default routing alone on the client side and only send specific traffic through the VPN. This way you don't need to guess the local network information, and don't load your company internet connection with traffic that does not need to be secured. It's not exactly trivial, but it is documented at http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/471/vpn35-split.h tml . I wouldn't be completely surprised if the Cisco client still broke something, but we have a few hundred users and haven't seen this particular problem outside of the private IP space overlap issue.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by restringting access to local networks. You still need to at least have an IP address before you can set up a tunnel. Also, we have set up split tunnelling on our setup and it works fine. Only traffic destined to our internal network gets sent over the VPN. The problem that we have had with airports is when they are set up in a private IP space that coincides with our private IP space. Too bad it happens to be that way with our local airport.
I would have to respectfully disagree. I run a VPN3030 installation and it has provided numerous headaches when coupled with the Cisco VPN Client for both Windows and OSX. The clients frequently got disconnected from the concentrator until we disabled IKE keepalives and changed the rekeying interval to 8 hours. The WEBVPN feature absolutely sucks, having caused several crashes and rendering several web pages badly. The client for OSX on Intel fails miserably; we're pushing out Cisco's new client for that, but I'm skeptical.
Worst of all, Cisco's TAC is horrid for this product. One support engineer actually told us to disable the firewall on SP2 in order to allow the client to connect, rather than opening the specific ports that are necessary for the connection (hello, we're trying to secure our internal applications, not expose them to any shmuck who decides to 'own' an unprotected XP machine). Another referred to our Heimdal kerberos server as "third party" since he had never heard of a kerberos server outside of Active Directory.
The only case where we haven't had problems is for the few users that we have set up PIX boxes for at their homes. Not exactly an ideal setup for mobile users.
Cisco has assured us that the ASA does not suck as bad. We'll see when the evaluation unit gets in.
People who make a lot of money did so because they wanted to make a lot of money. They generally don't stop wanting to make more money after the first few millions. The reason is simple. Most of these artists are has-beens with a huge followowing of aging fans that are in their peak-earning years or whose kids have grown and are flush with disposable income. These fans would rather shell out AU$1530 (in the case of Barbara Streisand) than spend a weekend in a tent at the box office for good seats. I couldn't find any lists of the highest priced acts, but Rolling stones has an interesting list of the most lucrative acts at http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/9447993/the _richest_rock_stars_of_2006. Here's the top 10. How many do you think are selling tickets to young new fans compared to middle-aged fans looking to relive their youth?
U2, $154.2 million The Rolling Stones, $92.5 million Eagles, $63.2 million Paul McCartney, $56 million Elton John, $48.9 million Neil Diamond, $44.7 million Jimmy Buffett, $44 million Rod Stewart, $40.3 million Dave Matthews Band, $39.6 million Celine Dion, $38.5 million
Re:Submitter waited for this?
on
Google Calendar
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
You hit the nail right on the head. In the United States at least, AIDS is far more of a social problem than a medical problem. The fact that it firt appeared in the gay male community has had an enormous impact on the way that the disease is perceived.
For society that was founded on puitanical grounds, AIDS has been a godsend (pun intended). The evangelicals had a way to immediately lash out against homosexuality as the cause of all of our problems. When the disease migrated to the straight population, we were inundated with the I-got-AIDS-on-my-first-time stories and told to save ourselves for marriage. Fear, whether of AIDS or the lake of fire, is the puritan's greatest weapon.
Then there's the fact that a large portion of our entertainment industry is gay. With the deaths of Rock Hudson and Liberace on thier minds, entertainers became more open and it gradually became more acceptable to homosexuals to "come out." The most significant positive side-effect of AIDS has been the acceptance of homosexuality as at least real, if not acceptable, to American society in general.
The somewhat ironic thing is that without the wanton promiscuity that came about as a backlash against Amirican puritanism, AIDS would not be nearly as widespread as it is today. If it were acceptable to have sex with more than one person on a regular basis, but within a group of mutually respected, trusted, and loved individuals, containment of the disease would be far easier. As it is we live on two extermes: one of excess and one of fear, and the two ideologies feed each other.
AIDS in the US if far more of a social construct than a medical one. There are very few places outside of sub-Saharan Africa that have a greater than 2% infection rate, and even so a great majority of those 2% are in well-defined high-risk groups. Yes, prevention is needed. Yes, research into medical treatment is needed. But can we stop calling it a pandemic already? Sensationalism does not serve the public interest.
Those are US wholesale costs. Since manufactureing costs 57 cents a pill for tenofovir and 87 cents for Truvada I doubt you'll see prices like $650/month outside of the United States. Isn't it great to live in the best country in the world that treats the health of its citizens as a top priority? USA, USA, USA.
What's with the qoute at the end: This is very promising. For us to be involved in a potential solution to the big HIV crisis and pandemic is very exciting.
Pandemic? Really? Tuberculosis affects far more people worldwide but doesn't have all the sensationalism that we see surrounding AIDS. I don't mean to imply that nothing is being done about TB, or that AIDS isn't a problem, but I'm tired of the media treating this disease like we're all living on the set of "Rent"
My father..AIDS! My sister...AIDS!
My uncle and my cousin and her best friend AIDS.
Gays, straights, whites and spades,
everyone has AIDS.
My grandma and my old dog Blue.
The Pope has got it and so do you.
Come on everybody we've got quiltin' to do.
Gonna break down these barricades everyone has AIDS,
AIDS, AIDS, AIDS...
Ah, I was too hasty interpreting "administrative" to mean "non-customer-facing". That was foolish and you certainly can't tell your customers to use a supported browser or fuck off (at least not in the case of IE). That said, I fail to understand how posting a question to Slashdot is expected to provide better insight than running the beta. It probably involves more actual effort as well.
Shannanigans
on
AJAX and IE7?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Let's see: The poster has an in-house web application and has gone so far as to prototype an AJAX-ified interface. After all of this work is done, it appears that the new interface may improve productivity, but the idea is scrapped wholesale over some ephemeral fears that IE7 _might_ break their site, and an Ask Slashdot is posted.
How hard is it to download the IE7 beta? The app is in-house so if it breaks tell IE7 users to fuck off until support is added for it. Is moochfish totally inept or just trying to fan the 'IE7 is the suck' flames? My guess is the latter.
Slashdot Mirror
Is this official confirmation that not only do the corporations run the GOP, but also the "Democratic" party? I'm glad we have it out in the open.
While simply selling below cost is not a problem in itself, selling below cost in order to drive out competition is predatory pricing which violates the Sherman Antitrust Act. That's my point.
Whether or not this is true in this case is up to the courts to decide, but it appears that predatory pricing is what Rambus is accusing Micron and the manufacturers of.
Poor wording on my part. Wal*Mart is just following the lead of other mega-corporations before it. I used them as an example because they are the most notorious company that uses the tactic today. And, yes, they do sell below cost; it's been demonstrated in court.
They're claiming that DDR manufacturers colluded to reduce prices, thereby taking a temporary hit in profit while driving Rambus out of business. All in the interest of future profits. Thank Wal*Mart for the idea.
No, it won't.
When Vista ships, everyone will be me, unless people go out and buy new computers specifically for Vista.
They will, or more appropriately they won't upgrade to Vista until they buy a new computer.
The majority of users don't buy all new hardware when a new OS comes out.
You are correct. The majority of users keep using the factory-installed OS until they buy a new computer regardless of new releases.
But... they are doing that. Vista is supposed to run with XP (and 2000) drivers.
Really? Then why is MS distributing this paper to XP driver writers about backward compatability issues? If you have evidence that MS has indicated that all XP drivers are supported then please enlighten me. Even if they have said so the cited paper (directed to driver developers) leaves some ambiguity.
You're a little... um... pessimistic about hardware providers.
Yes I am.
Most large providers do care about their customers...
Most large provider's customers are HP, Dell, Gateway, etc., not you and I.
It's the small vendors who typically don't.
If there's one person championing the openness of drivers it's Theo de Raadt, and he thinks otherwise.
You missed the point. I never said that they did this for older hardware; I said that for an overwhelming majority of users, it doesn't matter.
Then Microsoft doesn't care about you. Any attempt that MS makes toward making an "upgrade" version of Vista will be an afterthought. They don't make enough money on it to really care. Sorry that you're not part of a significant market; Isn't capitalism grand? As far as "bleeding edge" goes, by the time Vista ships you won't need "bleeding edge", you'll just need "new."
Now, that means that Microsoft now has a responsibility to make sure that when they change the driver model, they either maintain driver compatibility, or make sure all the vendors have new drivers.
No it doesn't. It means that they can't change the driver model while simultaneously stating that their new operating system will run on any existing system that has drivers for the old model. They are very clearly not doing this. Nothing in XP will break because Vista is released.
the vendor is at fault in Linux's case, and Microsoft is at fault in Microsoft's case
It's the vendor's fault in both cases and the vendor doesn't care in either case. Most large vendors don't give a rat's ass about Linux because the market is too small for them. They don't give a rat's ass about supporting the crap you already bought on a new Windows platform (unless they're still selling the same crap). If you're not buying new gear, they don't care about you.
This is where the small vendors can come in and make a little extra money by putting forth the effort to at least provide specs for non-Windows developers to use. Good for them.
I don't know about you, but I'm anxiosly awaiting the review of his shiny new Goochy watch.
BTW, isn't the Slashdot mentality great? Poor driver support for Linux: "Broadcom/ATI/whoever Is The Devil." Poor driver support for Windows: "Vista Beta 2 has Major Problems." Go Figure.
Oxfam does this. But if you actually gave a shit you'd know this already instead of blindly bashing the $100 laptop project. After all there's more than one way to try to help others and nobody is forcing you to do it their way.
I don't know what she wore, but she listens to the Beatles and Rolling Stones on her iPod. I don't know about you, but I'm going to vote for the candidate that likes to "shake things up."
Our lawmakers' real constituancy has spoken.
Yeah, who want's to RIM a troll? Yuck.
Oh, please. Next you'll be telling us that IE is created by humans in exchamge for money, instead of being magically emitted from Bill Gates' ass. Enough of your lies!
The VPN 3000 can be configured to leave default routing alone on the client side and only send specific traffic through the VPN. This way you don't need to guess the local network information, and don't load your company internet connection with traffic that does not need to be secured. It's not exactly trivial, but it is documented at http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/471/vpn35-split.h tml . I wouldn't be completely surprised if the Cisco client still broke something, but we have a few hundred users and haven't seen this particular problem outside of the private IP space overlap issue.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by restringting access to local networks. You still need to at least have an IP address before you can set up a tunnel. Also, we have set up split tunnelling on our setup and it works fine. Only traffic destined to our internal network gets sent over the VPN. The problem that we have had with airports is when they are set up in a private IP space that coincides with our private IP space. Too bad it happens to be that way with our local airport.
Worst of all, Cisco's TAC is horrid for this product. One support engineer actually told us to disable the firewall on SP2 in order to allow the client to connect, rather than opening the specific ports that are necessary for the connection (hello, we're trying to secure our internal applications, not expose them to any shmuck who decides to 'own' an unprotected XP machine). Another referred to our Heimdal kerberos server as "third party" since he had never heard of a kerberos server outside of Active Directory.
The only case where we haven't had problems is for the few users that we have set up PIX boxes for at their homes. Not exactly an ideal setup for mobile users.
Cisco has assured us that the ASA does not suck as bad. We'll see when the evaluation unit gets in.
I'll go out on a limb and guess that word problems are not your forte.
People who make a lot of money did so because they wanted to make a lot of money. They generally don't stop wanting to make more money after the first few millions. The reason is simple. Most of these artists are has-beens with a huge followowing of aging fans that are in their peak-earning years or whose kids have grown and are flush with disposable income. These fans would rather shell out AU$1530 (in the case of Barbara Streisand) than spend a weekend in a tent at the box office for good seats. I couldn't find any lists of the highest priced acts, but Rolling stones has an interesting list of the most lucrative acts at http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/9447993/the _richest_rock_stars_of_2006. Here's the top 10. How many do you think are selling tickets to young new fans compared to middle-aged fans looking to relive their youth?
U2, $154.2 million
The Rolling Stones, $92.5 million
Eagles, $63.2 million
Paul McCartney, $56 million
Elton John, $48.9 million
Neil Diamond, $44.7 million
Jimmy Buffett, $44 million
Rod Stewart, $40.3 million
Dave Matthews Band, $39.6 million
Celine Dion, $38.5 million
Google farts.
Slashdot sniffs.
Film at 11.
Because they could care less.
You hit the nail right on the head. In the United States at least, AIDS is far more of a social problem than a medical problem. The fact that it firt appeared in the gay male community has had an enormous impact on the way that the disease is perceived.
For society that was founded on puitanical grounds, AIDS has been a godsend (pun intended). The evangelicals had a way to immediately lash out against homosexuality as the cause of all of our problems. When the disease migrated to the straight population, we were inundated with the I-got-AIDS-on-my-first-time stories and told to save ourselves for marriage. Fear, whether of AIDS or the lake of fire, is the puritan's greatest weapon.
Then there's the fact that a large portion of our entertainment industry is gay. With the deaths of Rock Hudson and Liberace on thier minds, entertainers became more open and it gradually became more acceptable to homosexuals to "come out." The most significant positive side-effect of AIDS has been the acceptance of homosexuality as at least real, if not acceptable, to American society in general.
The somewhat ironic thing is that without the wanton promiscuity that came about as a backlash against Amirican puritanism, AIDS would not be nearly as widespread as it is today. If it were acceptable to have sex with more than one person on a regular basis, but within a group of mutually respected, trusted, and loved individuals, containment of the disease would be far easier. As it is we live on two extermes: one of excess and one of fear, and the two ideologies feed each other.
AIDS in the US if far more of a social construct than a medical one. There are very few places outside of sub-Saharan Africa that have a greater than 2% infection rate, and even so a great majority of those 2% are in well-defined high-risk groups. Yes, prevention is needed. Yes, research into medical treatment is needed. But can we stop calling it a pandemic already? Sensationalism does not serve the public interest.
Those are US wholesale costs. Since manufactureing costs 57 cents a pill for tenofovir and 87 cents for Truvada I doubt you'll see prices like $650/month outside of the United States. Isn't it great to live in the best country in the world that treats the health of its citizens as a top priority? USA, USA, USA.
Pandemic? Really? Tuberculosis affects far more people worldwide but doesn't have all the sensationalism that we see surrounding AIDS. I don't mean to imply that nothing is being done about TB, or that AIDS isn't a problem, but I'm tired of the media treating this disease like we're all living on the set of "Rent"
Ah, I was too hasty interpreting "administrative" to mean "non-customer-facing". That was foolish and you certainly can't tell your customers to use a supported browser or fuck off (at least not in the case of IE). That said, I fail to understand how posting a question to Slashdot is expected to provide better insight than running the beta. It probably involves more actual effort as well.
How hard is it to download the IE7 beta? The app is in-house so if it breaks tell IE7 users to fuck off until support is added for it. Is moochfish totally inept or just trying to fan the 'IE7 is the suck' flames? My guess is the latter.