So I was quietly wondering if the Chinese used their "very privileged" access to Windows Source code to help find the Zero Day in IE. Is that what Balmer meant when he said he was interested in being part of the solution in China?
I briefly talked about some of it on my blog. Good thing I did.
http://geekspeaker.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!588D13 9CAFEFE462!921.entry
I've been working on a similar system for over a year. I didn't think someone was going to patent it. I assume Google has been working on a similar method for quite some time. I have diagrams that go back for over a year when I first had the idea.
I've been trying to get some folks at my company more involved but it takes forever to get my ideas moving at my company. It's pretty frustrating to see something like this get a patent on it.
The reason why this is so important is so many people spend more money via their cars which means advertising could be sucked back out of the internet in the not so near future perhaps.
What incentive is there for Microsoft to spend money on R&D, to invent cool new features like "Windows Key, Type, Enter" and Instant Desktop Search (Yes, a Microsoft Invention AFAIK) if they have to end up bidding to include it in their own OS to someone who merely copied them? When making a decision, one must not only look at the direct impact of that decision, but the indirect ones.
If Microsoft were forced into bidding on including it's own inventions, then their R&D department would be smart to do nothing but submarine patents on all improvements, which would be smarter than introducing an invention that they would be forced to bid billions of dollars on shipping, in order to include in their own operating system.
I could see if Microsoft was trying to use it's desktop dominance to take over Google's Cash Cow, Internet Search, but Microsoft is only searching locally and soon across the LAN. (In 50 years when Windows gets a new file System.)
I could see if Google was a freedom fighter for user's spending their hard earned cash on things like their Dell bid to get a Google install wizard in their for us which asks user's what provider they want to use, but they are not interested in doing this, rather stuffing their own wares down the throats of users who don't want them or don't know they have them.
One more point I want to make. There are too many people trying to turn this into a political conversation when in fact it's a conversation about competition and user choice. At some point Microsoft should be able to keep improving it's operating system and if at some point they are caught doing things like slowing down Google's Search (I doubt it) they need smacked harder than the EU had nerve to do so as they should have learned their lesson by now.
I'm sorry people, you can't fault a company who has worked closely with competitors and had this much over site in building their OS and then wait until they ship it and tell them to go back and redesign in. This is called over regulation, Google is no kitten, let the two of the duke it out, and we have no business doing anything but watching for low blows.
Let's be pragmatic, companies which only innovate, and don't persue patents, will lose. Unless laws change, there is no other way of doing business, period.
Both projects actually aim to do the same thing, although their approches will vary.
Google's plan is to digitize and index every single book in the world. While this work is done, each and every author/publisher can opt out, by sending word that Google is not to let their books available to read. Google will still let a small amount of text to be read of these books as specified by Fair Use. Fair use in this case is still being determined by the courts, under two seperate lawsuits.
Google is working with Publishers and major universities and libraries. Information on Google's publisher program can be located here: https://print.google.com/publisher/?hl=en_US and Googles , and info on Google's Library program can be located here: http://print.google.com/googleprint/library.html
Basically, any book written before 1922 is considered public domain and both services will index and let anyone read any of these books from cover to cover.
The OCA (Open Content Alliance) is digitizing and indexing all books that were written before 1922, and then only those that publishers opt-in, or other works which are considered public domain.
Hope that helps.
The open content alliance is the answer to Google print which in large part was pushed to fruition by Yahoo! The major difference here is this plan only puts books in their index which have HAD approval by the authors/publishers.
Google has said that this won't work because most of the work out there would be passed up and never get put online. For more information about Google Print check out http://print.google.com/intl/en/googleprint/about. html
At this time, Google is working with the following librarys: University of Michigan, Harvard University, Stanford University, The New York Public Library, and Oxford University.
I don't doubt that you speak from experience, but you have to admit, when a systemboard on a huge SUN server needs replaced this many times, there seems to be a little problem which might extend beyond the scope of hardware engineering. We still employ SUN Solutions, but I do think this was a major turning point with my company.
Where possible we went with more Linux and IBM solutions as a result. Before IBM sold off it's PC unit, we were at one time IBM's Largest customer.
The are people at my company that had 4 months of absolute hell because of some of these problems with SUN hardware. Hell! For months where they had no time with their family, and SUN didn't do much to help the problem besides sending a new board every few days that didn't work. Like I said, I am rooting for Sun, I have always like their products for the most part, but if anyone else had experiences like this, it would explain in part the problems they have had selling huge amounts of servers lately.
Alright, while I don't pretend to downplay the genious of a company who has always grabbed headlines since the inception of computing as we know today, there are more issues than innovation in which a CTO must underwrite.
Trust is an important factor. How does Sun gain the trust of our CTO's? In today's "You better get it all done with this much money and have 99 percent uptime or it's YOUR ass" CTO job descriptions, CTOs get much more sleep at night on non SUN solutions.
We once had sun replace a systemboard on a very expensive SUN server 21 times before this server was usable again. I think this marked a turning point with us (IBM's largest customer) and we were far more apprehensive towards this company from that series of moments on. I could go on but I am actually rooting for Sun.
No but seriously, nice hot summers floating on a raft with a nice brew in hand out in my pool are really starting to suck! Not to mention I only get to scrape ice off my car's windows until my hands are blue for 5-6 months out of the year now.
Yeah! There's an invention that all businesses can celebrate! Too bad for the guy who was making a killing off of selling pans to collect funds! There is still good money for those people who know how to fix very old cash registers, as they add character to certain businesses.
When Microsoft signed the deal with Sun, they never realized that Google might want to use that against them. They can now use Sun software as a service via Google, and infringe on any of Microsoft's Office patents, without the threat of a lawsuit. OpenOffice does not have this ability. Microsoft WOULD sue Openoffice.org if it became very popular. Under the agreement, there is no limit to the way Sun could distribute the application/service.
It's about time the pragmatic father of Linux today chimed in on Lixus TCO. I wonder what the Redmond folks will have to say about this study. The findings are so different than Microsoft's, I think I will take some time to exploit the different ways in which each company came up with two totally different TCO's.
I would guess it has something to do with IBM being the current offshoring leader in Todays' IT department.
How is this insight? Lack of sight is more accurate. I am not Microsoft Fanboi, but let's not re-write history with our emotion. Vista had many of OSX's features planned and communicated before OSX had them. Search is the big one of course. Stardock has prior art on Windows animations so OSX ripped that off too! Microsoft is following suit as well though.
For what it's worth first post at/. (=
At the company I work for we have most of the "Old Folks" running the mainframe work. There are younger folks learning/doing the mainframe programming/operations as well though. Os400's are the same way, we put so much value in these systems however, that I can hardly see the day when we can no longer fill that work. Our company actively tries to make that knowledge a company wide commodity by documentation of just about every single if/when/then do type event. Code that is documented correctly according to enterprise standards also let's the next person in know what's going on much faster.
The story is right, there are not many 21-year-old folks who are thinking about writing the next killer app in a mainframe environment.
Slashdot Mirror
So I was quietly wondering if the Chinese used their "very privileged" access to Windows Source code to help find the Zero Day in IE. Is that what Balmer meant when he said he was interested in being part of the solution in China?
I briefly talked about some of it on my blog. Good thing I did. http://geekspeaker.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!588D13 9CAFEFE462!921.entry
I've been working on a similar system for over a year. I didn't think someone was going to patent it. I assume Google has been working on a similar method for quite some time. I have diagrams that go back for over a year when I first had the idea.
I've been trying to get some folks at my company more involved but it takes forever to get my ideas moving at my company. It's pretty frustrating to see something like this get a patent on it.
The reason why this is so important is so many people spend more money via their cars which means advertising could be sucked back out of the internet in the not so near future perhaps.
What incentive is there for Microsoft to spend money on R&D, to invent cool new features like "Windows Key, Type, Enter" and Instant Desktop Search (Yes, a Microsoft Invention AFAIK) if they have to end up bidding to include it in their own OS to someone who merely copied them? When making a decision, one must not only look at the direct impact of that decision, but the indirect ones. If Microsoft were forced into bidding on including it's own inventions, then their R&D department would be smart to do nothing but submarine patents on all improvements, which would be smarter than introducing an invention that they would be forced to bid billions of dollars on shipping, in order to include in their own operating system. I could see if Microsoft was trying to use it's desktop dominance to take over Google's Cash Cow, Internet Search, but Microsoft is only searching locally and soon across the LAN. (In 50 years when Windows gets a new file System.) I could see if Google was a freedom fighter for user's spending their hard earned cash on things like their Dell bid to get a Google install wizard in their for us which asks user's what provider they want to use, but they are not interested in doing this, rather stuffing their own wares down the throats of users who don't want them or don't know they have them. One more point I want to make. There are too many people trying to turn this into a political conversation when in fact it's a conversation about competition and user choice. At some point Microsoft should be able to keep improving it's operating system and if at some point they are caught doing things like slowing down Google's Search (I doubt it) they need smacked harder than the EU had nerve to do so as they should have learned their lesson by now. I'm sorry people, you can't fault a company who has worked closely with competitors and had this much over site in building their OS and then wait until they ship it and tell them to go back and redesign in. This is called over regulation, Google is no kitten, let the two of the duke it out, and we have no business doing anything but watching for low blows.
Let's be pragmatic, companies which only innovate, and don't persue patents, will lose. Unless laws change, there is no other way of doing business, period.
Both projects actually aim to do the same thing, although their approches will vary. Google's plan is to digitize and index every single book in the world. While this work is done, each and every author/publisher can opt out, by sending word that Google is not to let their books available to read. Google will still let a small amount of text to be read of these books as specified by Fair Use. Fair use in this case is still being determined by the courts, under two seperate lawsuits. Google is working with Publishers and major universities and libraries. Information on Google's publisher program can be located here: https://print.google.com/publisher/?hl=en_US and Googles , and info on Google's Library program can be located here: http://print.google.com/googleprint/library.html Basically, any book written before 1922 is considered public domain and both services will index and let anyone read any of these books from cover to cover. The OCA (Open Content Alliance) is digitizing and indexing all books that were written before 1922, and then only those that publishers opt-in, or other works which are considered public domain. Hope that helps.
The open content alliance is the answer to Google print which in large part was pushed to fruition by Yahoo! The major difference here is this plan only puts books in their index which have HAD approval by the authors/publishers. Google has said that this won't work because most of the work out there would be passed up and never get put online. For more information about Google Print check out http://print.google.com/intl/en/googleprint/about. html
At this time, Google is working with the following librarys: University of Michigan, Harvard University, Stanford University, The New York Public Library, and Oxford University.
I don't doubt that you speak from experience, but you have to admit, when a systemboard on a huge SUN server needs replaced this many times, there seems to be a little problem which might extend beyond the scope of hardware engineering. We still employ SUN Solutions, but I do think this was a major turning point with my company. Where possible we went with more Linux and IBM solutions as a result. Before IBM sold off it's PC unit, we were at one time IBM's Largest customer. The are people at my company that had 4 months of absolute hell because of some of these problems with SUN hardware. Hell! For months where they had no time with their family, and SUN didn't do much to help the problem besides sending a new board every few days that didn't work. Like I said, I am rooting for Sun, I have always like their products for the most part, but if anyone else had experiences like this, it would explain in part the problems they have had selling huge amounts of servers lately.
Alright, while I don't pretend to downplay the genious of a company who has always grabbed headlines since the inception of computing as we know today, there are more issues than innovation in which a CTO must underwrite. Trust is an important factor. How does Sun gain the trust of our CTO's? In today's "You better get it all done with this much money and have 99 percent uptime or it's YOUR ass" CTO job descriptions, CTOs get much more sleep at night on non SUN solutions. We once had sun replace a systemboard on a very expensive SUN server 21 times before this server was usable again. I think this marked a turning point with us (IBM's largest customer) and we were far more apprehensive towards this company from that series of moments on. I could go on but I am actually rooting for Sun.
No but seriously, nice hot summers floating on a raft with a nice brew in hand out in my pool are really starting to suck! Not to mention I only get to scrape ice off my car's windows until my hands are blue for 5-6 months out of the year now.
Yeah! There's an invention that all businesses can celebrate! Too bad for the guy who was making a killing off of selling pans to collect funds! There is still good money for those people who know how to fix very old cash registers, as they add character to certain businesses.
Well? It is.
When Microsoft signed the deal with Sun, they never realized that Google might want to use that against them. They can now use Sun software as a service via Google, and infringe on any of Microsoft's Office patents, without the threat of a lawsuit. OpenOffice does not have this ability. Microsoft WOULD sue Openoffice.org if it became very popular. Under the agreement, there is no limit to the way Sun could distribute the application/service.
Go Google!
It's about time the pragmatic father of Linux today chimed in on Lixus TCO. I wonder what the Redmond folks will have to say about this study. The findings are so different than Microsoft's, I think I will take some time to exploit the different ways in which each company came up with two totally different TCO's. I would guess it has something to do with IBM being the current offshoring leader in Todays' IT department.
How is this insight? Lack of sight is more accurate. I am not Microsoft Fanboi, but let's not re-write history with our emotion. Vista had many of OSX's features planned and communicated before OSX had them. Search is the big one of course. Stardock has prior art on Windows animations so OSX ripped that off too! Microsoft is following suit as well though.
For what it's worth first post at /. (=
At the company I work for we have most of the "Old Folks" running the mainframe work. There are younger folks learning/doing the mainframe programming/operations as well though. Os400's are the same way, we put so much value in these systems however, that I can hardly see the day when we can no longer fill that work. Our company actively tries to make that knowledge a company wide commodity by documentation of just about every single if/when/then do type event. Code that is documented correctly according to enterprise standards also let's the next person in know what's going on much faster.
The story is right, there are not many 21-year-old folks who are thinking about writing the next killer app in a mainframe environment.