That's what I've been doing too. I happen to like Composer and think that Netscape removing it (along with Mail/News) basically takes away the features that make the "suite" a better choice then just the browser in a lot of situations. I'm grateful that the Mozilla folks have so far opted to keep the suite alive, I hope they don't follow the same path as Netscape on this one.
Thanks Bruce, just signed and left my two cents on the Xandros deal. I'll swing by later and put some thought into a note and petition signature to Novell.
Huh, I didn't even know it was out yet... Well of course it, as a franchise, did so much better in disc sales. A bet a lot of people that bought the discs just went and saw III in the theatre (assuming they don't need plot, character development, logic or suspension of disbelief that is.:-)
I'd say it's an unfair comparison. Pirates II is new enough that some residual excitement exists. Matirx is so 90's at this point. Besides that if your anything like me then Matrix III ruined them all for you, I just thought it sucked. Pirates II was pretty good but it would suprise me none-at-all if Pirates III sucks too. Something about pushing an idea to far seems to make most III's suck in general, especially in comparison to the first in a series.
Possible exceptions (IMHO) are LOTR III, which was a natural as the books were a trilogy and to a lesser extent Star Wars III which was the only one even remotely worth watching as far as I'm concerned.
If I recall correctly those 235 patents do not all belong to MS. They just like to throw that number around because it sounds scary to people who have to worry about their company getting sued. My understanding is that a lot of the patents in the 235 are owned by FLOSS friendly companies like IBM.
But, call me cynical, I can't see MS at any point giving up the one's they do have. As other posters have mentioned they are more valuable as FUD material then anything else.
Because wants home users (typical OE users) to easily connect to whatever protocol is appropriate for them without issue so they don't get frustrated and look for alternatives.
On the other hand they want corp. admins (typical OL/Exchange users) to work best with their protocol on thier server and make working with say Outlook connecting to imapd on Linux to be just frustrating enough to make them think it's more trouble then it's worth.
I find the situation with AD and LDAP to be very similar. Sure, AD is based on LDAP but it's been extented just enough to make using standard LDAP tools a PITA.
Yes that sounds familiar as well. Both here and my last job I get the same calls over and over for VPN and Citrix access.
Them: I can't connect to Citrix! What's wrong. Us: OK, are you connected to the internet? Them: What, I'm trying to connect now! Us: Open a browser and try surfing to Google. Them: OK (grumble, bitch, grumble, thirty seconds go by...) It says something about not being able to connect to the site! Us: You have to connect to the internet first, then Citrix/VPN. Them: Um, OK. Us: You need help getting your connection up? Them: Uh no, I got it, sorry to bother you. (another few minutes go by, phone rings, a humbler voice asks...) Them: Can you help me with my internet connection, it seems to be down.
The worst part, the same people call about it tens of times before they finally get it. Oh well, job security!
Agreed, and it looks like it backfired on them. I can't imagine they din't pay a lot more then $400 to litigate this. Now if they had hit that $10,000 payoff...
I'm glad it didn't work out for them, maybe they'll think twice before they decide to take the next bullet head on.
Our company had a sales rep in Baltimore who worked for us for a week before we (IT) heard anything from him. He calls us one day and complains his internet connection isn't working, what's the deal? After questioning him about providers and settings and what not we figure out that he never signed up for any service, didn't know he needed to and was very confused when we told him he was using someone elses unsecured wireless. He literally had just turned on his Windows box the first day he got home, connected (automagically) to a neighbor's wireless and assumed that computers were supposed to do that. As if all PCs came with "free" internet, no configuration required.
Since when does any decent GUI based Linux distro not have a Start Menu? (Of course it may say Applications instead but I suppose that's really confusing as well?)
I fully agree but at the same time I recently decided I really wanted a laptop, got my company to approve it and convinced myself that there was no way I wanted to use Ubuntu/Debia on my home and work PCs and Windows on a laptop. I don't mind Windows per se and need it to use some company programs we rely on (Great Pains!) but I use it in a VM now when I need to and can pretty much do the rest of the day to day on Linux. So... I researched and I ended up getting a laptop from LinuxCertified. Was it as cheap as an equivelent Dell or HP with XP on it? No, I don't think so. But it was worth it to me to pay a little extra because when I got it everything Just Worked.
My point being what many have stated before; until hardware vendors accept Linux en masse it is not something an average user is going to deal with. But if you want a Linux PC/Laptop (as with anything you purchase for more then a few hundred dollars!) it really pays to do some research ahead of time. There is compatible hardware out there, you just have to find it. If the Big Boys (like Dell) start supporting Linux, then yes, it will be a no brainer for Joe User to buy a Linux box. As of now it's like picking between BluRay and HDDVD, you need to do some research to figure out what you really want. If you don't and get stuck with something you don't want then I hope whomever you bought it from has a good return policy.
But trademarks are very different from copyrights, and there is nothing in copyright similar to abandoning a trademark. But we're not talking about copyright either, this is about patents. IANAL either but if I recall correctly you are not allowed to knowingly allow patent violations to build up over time just so there will be more people to sue. If you are aware of someone willfully violating your patent you need to sue in a timely fashion. Not sure what the limit is but I'm pretty sure running around trying to make your case in the press instead of court will end up working against you if you do finally litigate.
It's not really about asking Linus or wanting his opinion. What is important is that the lead developer of the supposedly infringing product has come out and stated "prove it". At this point, until MS puts up or shuts up, it's his word against theirs. If MS can create uncertainty with their claims in the business community then it's nice to see Linus counter that with some uncertainty about MS's claims.
Don't these companies realize how much they are harming consumers when they are slow to adopt these restricti^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H rights management technologies?
An attempt to lure people back to using it? "Oh look, the shiny, I forgot how cool the new IE looks. Why did my cousin tell me to use this Mozilla thing again? Oh well, I wonder if Joe updated his MySpace..."
MS's response to this underhanded attempt? "Oh, well that was an oversight in the patching process, sorry won't happen again". </paranoid>
Slashdot Mirror
Flame On!
</sarcasm>
Um maybe it's just me but $ is a pretty obvious substitue for S while zzz looks nothing like an x.
Nice troll job though...
And you can't take the hypothetical executable text file mentioned by the GPP and create a link to this on the menu?
That's what I've been doing too. I happen to like Composer and think that Netscape removing it (along with Mail/News) basically takes away the features that make the "suite" a better choice then just the browser in a lot of situations. I'm grateful that the Mozilla folks have so far opted to keep the suite alive, I hope they don't follow the same path as Netscape on this one.
Thanks Bruce, just signed and left my two cents on the Xandros deal. I'll swing by later and put some thought into a note and petition signature to Novell.
Huh, I didn't even know it was out yet... Well of course it, as a franchise, did so much better in disc sales. A bet a lot of people that bought the discs just went and saw III in the theatre (assuming they don't need plot, character development, logic or suspension of disbelief that is. :-)
They have old music videos on YouTube? I still haven't gotten past the dog on a skateboard, cute cats and Star Wars kid. Boy am I out of the loop!
I'd say it's an unfair comparison. Pirates II is new enough that some residual excitement exists. Matirx is so 90's at this point.
Besides that if your anything like me then Matrix III ruined them all for you, I just thought it sucked. Pirates II was pretty
good but it would suprise me none-at-all if Pirates III sucks too. Something about pushing an idea to far seems to make most III's
suck in general, especially in comparison to the first in a series.
Possible exceptions (IMHO) are LOTR III, which was a natural as the books were a trilogy and to a lesser extent Star Wars III which
was the only one even remotely worth watching as far as I'm concerned.
If I recall correctly those 235 patents do not all belong to MS. They just like to throw that number around because it sounds scary to people who have to worry about their company getting sued. My understanding is that a lot of the patents in the 235 are owned by FLOSS friendly companies like IBM.
But, call me cynical, I can't see MS at any point giving up the one's they do have. As other posters have mentioned they are more valuable as FUD material then anything else.
Because wants home users (typical OE users) to easily connect to whatever protocol is appropriate for them without issue so they don't get frustrated and look for alternatives.
On the other hand they want corp. admins (typical OL/Exchange users) to work best with their protocol on thier server and make working with say Outlook connecting to imapd on Linux to be just frustrating enough to make them think it's more trouble then it's worth.
I find the situation with AD and LDAP to be very similar. Sure, AD is based on LDAP but it's been extented just enough to make using standard LDAP tools a PITA.
Yes that sounds familiar as well. Both here and my last job I get the same calls over and over for VPN and Citrix access.
Them: I can't connect to Citrix! What's wrong.
Us: OK, are you connected to the internet?
Them: What, I'm trying to connect now!
Us: Open a browser and try surfing to Google.
Them: OK (grumble, bitch, grumble, thirty seconds go by...) It says something about not being able to connect to the site!
Us: You have to connect to the internet first, then Citrix/VPN.
Them: Um, OK.
Us: You need help getting your connection up?
Them: Uh no, I got it, sorry to bother you.
(another few minutes go by, phone rings, a humbler voice asks...)
Them: Can you help me with my internet connection, it seems to be down.
The worst part, the same people call about it tens of times before they finally get it. Oh well, job security!
... everything needs to be "dumbed down" for the masses these days? *sigh*
but Kent County wants its free money.
Agreed, and it looks like it backfired on them. I can't imagine they din't pay a lot more then $400 to litigate this. Now if they had hit that $10,000 payoff...
I'm glad it didn't work out for them, maybe they'll think twice before they decide to take the next bullet head on.
Our company had a sales rep in Baltimore who worked for us for a week before we (IT) heard anything from him. He calls us one day and complains his internet connection isn't working, what's the deal? After questioning him about providers and settings and what not we figure out that he never signed up for any service, didn't know he needed to and was very confused when we told him he was using someone elses unsecured wireless. He literally had just turned on his Windows box the first day he got home, connected (automagically) to a neighbor's wireless and assumed that computers were supposed to do that. As if all PCs came with "free" internet, no configuration required.
Since when does any decent GUI based Linux distro not have a Start Menu? (Of course it may say Applications instead but I suppose that's really confusing as well?)
I fully agree but at the same time I recently decided I really wanted a laptop, got my company to approve it and convinced myself that there was no way I wanted to use Ubuntu/Debia on my home and work PCs and Windows on a laptop. I don't mind Windows per se and need it to use some company programs we rely on (Great Pains!) but I use it in a VM now when I need to and can pretty much do the rest of the day to day on Linux. So... I researched and I ended up getting a laptop from LinuxCertified. Was it as cheap as an equivelent Dell or HP with XP on it? No, I don't think so. But it was worth it to me to pay a little extra because when I got it everything Just Worked.
My point being what many have stated before; until hardware vendors accept Linux en masse it is not something an average user is going to deal with. But if you want a Linux PC/Laptop (as with anything you purchase for more then a few hundred dollars!) it really pays to do some research ahead of time. There is compatible hardware out there, you just have to find it. If the Big Boys (like Dell) start supporting Linux, then yes, it will be a no brainer for Joe User to buy a Linux box. As of now it's like picking between BluRay and HDDVD, you need to do some research to figure out what you really want. If you don't and get stuck with something you don't want then I hope whomever you bought it from has a good return policy.
Of course, at least 76% of the general public knows that...
not allowed to knowingly allow patent violations to build up over time just so there will be more people to sue. If
you are aware of someone willfully violating your patent you need to sue in a timely fashion. Not sure what the limit
is but I'm pretty sure running around trying to make your case in the press instead of court will end up working
against you if you do finally litigate.
It's not really about asking Linus or wanting his opinion. What is important is that the lead developer of the supposedly infringing product has come out and stated "prove it". At this point, until MS puts up or shuts up, it's his word against theirs. If MS can create uncertainty with their claims in the business community then it's nice to see Linus counter that with some uncertainty about MS's claims.
Cool, thanks.
Personally I don't see anything frelling wrong with hearing frak so often in the show!
That's exactly it! Don't you remember what got Farscape frellin' killed off the USA network?
Don't these companies realize how much they are harming consumers when they are slow to adopt these restricti^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H rights management technologies?
An attempt to lure people back to using it? "Oh look, the shiny, I forgot how cool the new IE looks. Why did my cousin tell me to use this Mozilla thing again? Oh well, I wonder if Joe updated his MySpace..."
MS's response to this underhanded attempt? "Oh, well that was an oversight in the patching process, sorry won't happen again".
</paranoid>