Quote: "Why don't major corporations have their own TLDs as part of the system? It would cut back on a lot of phishing and ICANN doesn't seem to be reluctant to do whatever they can to make a buck."
Because it would create a mess. Every domain holder can already use *.domain.com, so what would be the improvement? Also, don't forget that DNS needs a hierarchical system in order to function properly.
If you'd just go handing out TLD's the entire load would move to the root servers and it could break the system. Also, everyone (domain pirates) will start registering every TLD they can think of and the.com etc. names wouldn't be good enough anymore. Financially there wouldn't be any benefit, now they can sell every name multiple times under a different TLD.
And lastly, if a new country would be formed somewhere, which TLD would they get when the appropriate TLD would already have been hijacked by a domain pirate?
Microsoft's lawyer has agreed that there should be a device in order for a patent to be valid. Since Linux/OSS is not "married to a device" (as the lawyer names it) patents do not apply according to the theory of MS lawyer MR Olson.
Quote: "Unfortunately, the damage is done. I work for a large financial organization that was *just* venturing outside of Microsoft operating systems and the lawyers sent out a notice today that we are to remove all traces of "open source" software, effective immediately."
I know you'll be playing into MS/Novell's cards with this, but: Why not just purchase/migrate to Suse Linux Enterprise Server and be covered by the agreement if they're so upset about the whole patent thing? Or just purchase RedHat Enterprise Server and be covered with the indemnification they're providing?
They way you can still be using Open Source, CYA legally AND have commercial support.
If I recall correctly, there is much more litigation going on around software patents now than there was when the proposal was submitted. I don't believe that, in the light of all events since that time, a majority will be stupid enough to pass the software patent law now.
I think it's clear by now that the patent system has been saturated and patents for almost -anything- have been granted and it has become one giant mine field for programmers. The software patent system has obviously failed miserable. Economically it would just crush European software company's who haven't been filing obvious patents in the last 40 years (or so?), since they had no need to. I think that for the anti software patent groups it has become VERY VERY MUCH easier to prove that point today than it was when the law was first proposed in Europe.
Quote: "Well, a good admin should have plenty of time to read/. because they have a smooth running system, with scripts set up to do repetative tasks, and are really only there to put out fires and work on ongoing projects."
In what kind of world you live in? As soon have you have time to spare to arrange things properly they'll throw twice (or more) the workload at you. Eventually all you'll be doing is putting out fires because there is no time to do preventative maintenance. A good admin is then one that will prevent a complete disaster from happening for a couple of years until the inevitable happens..
I used to be like you were, really helping people out and making them happy. But since then IT in our company has grown fast and I became overloaded with work, from that point on I've became part of the "problem" and introduced a lot of bureaucracy in order to streamline the work. Bureaucracy is IMHO the most important sign of an understaffed IT department. Let's be honest, if there were SA's doing nothing, they'd be more than happy to do the paperwork for their users and arrange everything for them perfectly and on time. I've got a lot of frustrated users on my back yelling and screaming that everything goes so slowly and they can't get anything done. Even though I'd like nothing more than to sit down with them and discuss and fix everything for them, but I just don't have the slightest amount of time to do that. Sad but true..
Quote: "Your earning potential in the modern world is largely dependant on your Math and Language skills;"
I agree on the language part, but not on the math part. The math they teach you is highly unpractical and (almost) never going to solve any of the real-world problems. Let's be honest, most of the formulas you learn in math class are forgotten within 3 months. Why? Because you never need them.
They should teach you practical math based on solving REAL WORLD problems instead of the theoretical crap. Why not teach students to fetch the correct information to solve a problem from the internet? Or teach them how to find a tool (software program) that solves it for them? Why not teach them how to write a spreadsheet formula to solve it?
It may be practical for the -VERY FEW- people that are involved with math stuff on a daily basis to know how to write something down very short in very vague formulas. But why not just dedicate one page to explain it so everyone understands what is going on.
I always have the feeling that the very few people that actually understand it well use it to impress other people because they know nobody else is going to really understand what they are saying. Teaching people math is about the same thing as teaching everyone how to program in Linux and how to use all of the network specific and internal stuff, while this knowledge is very valuable for me personally it's only going to be useful to -very few- people.
And btw, which real world problems have you solved with your math knowledge lately? I am REALLY interested to hear that.
Quote: "I would guess that you are a Euro, from the smarmy superiority (but I could be wrong). The Mooks will have the EU under their thumb within the decade, with nary a shot fired. 25% of the current population is currently foreign with the bulk of that being . . . Muslim immigrants."
Actually I'm Dutch and I don't know WTF you were just talking about. What do the Muslims got to do with it and what are 'Mooks'?
And BTW, sorry for being concerned when seeing the images of the huge American military graveyards and Americans protesting to get their family members back safely.
I would guess you are a convinced American nationalist (but I could be wrong).
Seems that you didn't even take the time to Google for it before complaining.
Also, all of the extra cruft that MS adds to it's product are also a very big problem when a needless feature starts failing and users are shouting out. But I guess you need to be a system admin to know that.
I know that comparing paintball with real combat might be way off, although it made me realize how much war would suck. One thing I really missed during the game was oversight, not knowing the position of my teammates and the current status. Only turning your head to check could get you shot.
I believe the high-tech equipment would solve that, I can imagine this would save a lot of lives. As for the weight issues, I assume it will be solved in later versions.
I still can't say anything good about the American system of forcing civilians to fight a political war in a foreign country. Considering the amount of soldiers dying there I am extremely glad to live in a country where there is a volunteer army.
Quote: "Finally, I'm not aware of any reason why IMAP clients can't run on wireless devices?:)" They can, but if they were using standard technology how could they justify the high price?
But I believe Blackberry also does contacts and appointments. Although you might as well just use windows mobile or palm with Intellisync (which supports all of the features including message pushing). Novell actually includes all of that as part of the Novell Open Workgroup Suite, which works great btw.
Quote: "It's a lack of redundancies. Redundancies cost money, and we want everything as cheaply as possible. "
This is why I always stay calm when a server goes down. If it would be such a big problem, management would come to me, double my budget and tell me to never let it happen again.
It's all a cost/reliability tradeoff, the art of the business is to try to ignore the scream of terror of the people who are not in the position to make that decision.
So how many software patents do you know that cost a lot to invent, but the little time to copy once invented? And which of those inventions really did the world a favor? Encryption is the only one I can recall, and in this case it has been stalling wide adaption until the patent expired.
I can recall a lot more technology that wasn't patented and some got huge mainly because of that reason even though the patented variations on it were better. Yes, think about TCP/IP, I386, HTML, SMTP, OGG
And think about all of the wasted time of recreating an invention in the way it doesn't breach the patent! That time could have been spend on actually improving the invention.
Quote: "Should they really lose their patent after spending billions of dollars?"
The problem with software patents is that more money is spend on the patent and the patent lawyer than there is on research. Think about the 'wireless e-mail' patent the blackberry fell over, this was just a normal technological step and actually no invention at all. The problem seems to be that people all have been patenting the future about 10 years ago and it actually would be worth a patent if they sold it as a product back then. But now however, this is just common technology and just about anyone can create it as a product. I mean, with GPRS being common technology and available everywhere on mobile phones, it's just a -very small- step to transfer e-mail over it.
And if you compare software patents with normal hardware patent the problem quickly becomes obvious. In the real world people patent for example the inner working of a lock. In the software world, people actually manage to patent the lock itself as a device that "only allows the owner to access the room". And to make things worse, the patenting company sometimes doesn't even create the lock, but waits for other people who do come up with the all-to-obvious invention just to sue them!
All in all, software patents are the worst thing that ever happened to innovation. Europe has gone by fine for years without those damned software patents.
While people who type with two fingers often think the main advantage of touch typing is speed, it actually isn't the biggest advantage. The biggest advantage is that with touch typing you -never- have to look at the keyboard, therefore saving a lot of 'switching time' (looking at the monitor->keyboard and visa versa). Even a quick glimpse at the keyboard can break your concentration, causing you to have to reposition your eyes to look at the right line on the paper or the screen.
Also, with touch typing you can position your other fingers before you actually pressed the previous button. This minimizes the time between key-presses since you're optimally using all of your 10 fingers (including both of your pinkie fingers).
Another reason to learn to touch-type is that you will look more in control of the computer imho..
Your story seems to have some flaws: 1. Linden labs already pays taxes over all money they receive or pay out. 2. There is no insurance at all that the non-existent property will keep it's value.
In the end, there is nothing at all, and it's just a service being delivered by commercial company's. The virtual ground in Secondlife is actually worth nothing at all, since you are paying a monthly fee to keep the ground in existence. Not paying this monthly fee (over which taxes are being payed by linden labs) would cause the non-existent property to disappear. Also, these commercial company's could cancel the services without any obligation at all. If you were paying taxes over this non-existent property, there must be much more insurance than there is now. Also, what would happen with your "land investment" when linden labs would decide to release an unlimited amount of new land? Prices would drop to the ground instantly. This is something that just can't happen with real world real estate because the amount of space on the world/country's is limited.
An example: I'm "investing" (just 10 dollar) in a virtual stock exchange (not associated with Linden Labs) based on SecondLife company's. A few days ago the following message appeared for a company in which I own stock: "Market Alert: Trading in this security has been temporarily halted". The invested money in this company just vanished into thin air because the people behind the stock exchange decided that fraud may have been committed. No official investigation will be done and no government is involved. There is no way the government can have the players of SL to pay taxes for stuff that really has no value or insurance of that value at all.
In the end, SL is just a game and the players should expect their money to disappear into thin air sooner or later, without being able to claim any jurisdictional rights at all.
As a system administrator, I deal with these kinds of requests every day and in 90% these requests get rejected immediately. Working more efficiently on a PC is always about eliminating the efficiency bottle necks.
Here is why your calculation fails:
1. Every employee wants a TFT screen these days. 2. If one person in a room has a dual screen system, everybody wants one. The other people feeling neglected because they don't get one will be extra negatively effected in productivity. 3. Most workstations have to be upgraded to support dual-head in the first place. It takes quite some time for an ICT department to upgrade them.
4. It doesn't take 5 seconds to switch between applications, it only takes 2 seconds at -most-. If it takes you 5 seconds to switch then there are other efficiency issues. 5. People that can't type on they keyboard blindly will win more time getting typing lessons than they ever will with 2 monitors. Everyone typing blindly knows that the main point of inefficiently is moving your head up and down between the screen and the keyboard. Moving your head sideways with two monitors also costs time, so you only save 1 second. 6. If the additional monitor breaks it will have to be supported and replaced. 7. Often people double their salary's in the cost calculations because otherwise it won't add up. 8. Most people never bother to actually hand in a written proposal about what the ROI for the company is going to be.
Having two monitors is efficient only in the following case: - When you have to work with complex information which is in one application, while you have to work with it in another (or sometimes the same) application.
Because if you have to remember the information on the one screen in your head and then switch to the other application to do something with it, you will get very distracted especially when you're dealing with very complex issues.
Also, Google is a free (as in beer) service. If they charged a hefty fee (as Microsoft does) and were the de-facto standard (as Microsoft is) than that would certainly change things in my perspective. I believe that customers should then be able to -demand- an open API (which Google also gives away for free at this point).
I even think that if Microsoft wanted to license Google's services to rebrand it, they could even do that for a fair price even though they're the competition. Now THAT is fair competition and the free market working at it's best.
Microsoft on the other hand, does nothing of the above.
I believe you underestimate the time it takes to write these things. Also, don't forget about the large quantity of essays students have to write. In my experience, every class assigns at least one.
Although I always write them myself, I can very well imagine people cheating with a few of them they don't care about in order to save themselves some time to work on the other classes.
You're thinking the other way around, Vista runs ON the computer hardware you're buying.
What if you bought a car radio with FM/MP3/CD functionality for your car that said 'Works with any car'. After buying it you find out the FM stereo doesn't work with your car because the plug for your antenna isn't compatible, even though it's mentioned in the manual. If you downloaded the manual in advance from the manufacturer's website, you'd have known that. But still, the rest of the functionality still works, so it still -works- with any car although it's not the experience you expected.
What would you do? Accept the fact you can't listen to the radio or feel deceived and return the thing? I'd return it, because common sense is that because of the big text on the packaging you were made to believe you could utilize all of the functionality in your/any car.
As a generally well informed buyer, I actually download the manuals of equipment I'm looking to purchase before doing so. But still you can't expect everyone to do the same, especially not when you're actually in a shop with a pushy salesman.
Slashdot Mirror
Quote: "Why don't major corporations have their own TLDs as part of the system? It would cut back on a lot of phishing and ICANN doesn't seem to be reluctant to do whatever they can to make a buck."
.com etc. names wouldn't be good enough anymore.
Because it would create a mess. Every domain holder can already use *.domain.com, so what would be the improvement?
Also, don't forget that DNS needs a hierarchical system in order to function properly.
If you'd just go handing out TLD's the entire load would move to the root servers and it could break the system.
Also, everyone (domain pirates) will start registering every TLD they can think of and the
Financially there wouldn't be any benefit, now they can sell every name multiple times under a different TLD.
And lastly, if a new country would be formed somewhere, which TLD would they get when the appropriate TLD would already have been hijacked by a domain pirate?
According to this article MS doesn't have a case:o t-a-component/
http://boycottnovell.com/2007/05/15/software-is-n
Microsoft's lawyer has agreed that there should be a device in order for a patent to be valid.
Since Linux/OSS is not "married to a device" (as the lawyer names it) patents do not apply according to the theory of MS lawyer MR Olson.
Quote: "Unfortunately, the damage is done. I work for a large financial organization that was *just* venturing outside of Microsoft operating systems and the lawyers sent out a notice today that we are to remove all traces of "open source" software, effective immediately."
I know you'll be playing into MS/Novell's cards with this, but: Why not just purchase/migrate to Suse Linux Enterprise Server and be covered by the agreement if they're so upset about the whole patent thing?
Or just purchase RedHat Enterprise Server and be covered with the indemnification they're providing?
They way you can still be using Open Source, CYA legally AND have commercial support.
*all traces* clearly means FTP.EXE as well as the Windows TCP/IP stack, how about following some simple instructions eh?
If I recall correctly, there is much more litigation going on around software patents now than there was when the proposal was submitted. I don't believe that, in the light of all events since that time, a majority will be stupid enough to pass the software patent law now.
I think it's clear by now that the patent system has been saturated and patents for almost -anything- have been granted and it has become one giant mine field for programmers. The software patent system has obviously failed miserable. Economically it would just crush European software company's who haven't been filing obvious patents in the last 40 years (or so?), since they had no need to. I think that for the anti software patent groups it has become VERY VERY MUCH easier to prove that point today than it was when the law was first proposed in Europe.
What anarchy are you talking about? We've been doing just fine without software patents in Europe.
Quote: "Well, a good admin should have plenty of time to read /. because they have a smooth running system, with scripts set up to do repetative tasks, and are really only there to put out fires and work on ongoing projects."
In what kind of world you live in? As soon have you have time to spare to arrange things properly they'll throw twice (or more) the workload at you. Eventually all you'll be doing is putting out fires because there is no time to do preventative maintenance. A good admin is then one that will prevent a complete disaster from happening for a couple of years until the inevitable happens..
I used to be like you were, really helping people out and making them happy. But since then IT in our company has grown fast and I became overloaded with work, from that point on I've became part of the "problem" and introduced a lot of bureaucracy in order to streamline the work. Bureaucracy is IMHO the most important sign of an understaffed IT department. Let's be honest, if there were SA's doing nothing, they'd be more than happy to do the paperwork for their users and arrange everything for them perfectly and on time. I've got a lot of frustrated users on my back yelling and screaming that everything goes so slowly and they can't get anything done. Even though I'd like nothing more than to sit down with them and discuss and fix everything for them, but I just don't have the slightest amount of time to do that. Sad but true..
I hate to state the obvious, but doesn't passive FTP "fix" this "problem"?
Quote: "Your earning potential in the modern world is largely dependant on your Math and Language skills;"
I agree on the language part, but not on the math part.
The math they teach you is highly unpractical and (almost) never going to solve any of the real-world problems.
Let's be honest, most of the formulas you learn in math class are forgotten within 3 months. Why? Because you never need them.
They should teach you practical math based on solving REAL WORLD problems instead of the theoretical crap. Why not teach students to fetch the correct information to solve a problem from the internet? Or teach them how to find a tool (software program) that solves it for them? Why not teach them how to write a spreadsheet formula to solve it?
It may be practical for the -VERY FEW- people that are involved with math stuff on a daily basis to know how to write something down very short in very vague formulas. But why not just dedicate one page to explain it so everyone understands what is going on.
I always have the feeling that the very few people that actually understand it well use it to impress other people because they know nobody else is going to really understand what they are saying. Teaching people math is about the same thing as teaching everyone how to program in Linux and how to use all of the network specific and internal stuff, while this knowledge is very valuable for me personally it's only going to be useful to -very few- people.
And btw, which real world problems have you solved with your math knowledge lately? I am REALLY interested to hear that.
Quote: "I would guess that you are a Euro, from the smarmy superiority (but I could be wrong). The Mooks will have the EU under their thumb within the decade, with nary a shot fired. 25% of the current population is currently foreign with the bulk of that being . . . Muslim immigrants."
Actually I'm Dutch and I don't know WTF you were just talking about. What do the Muslims got to do with it and what are 'Mooks'?
And BTW, sorry for being concerned when seeing the images of the huge American military graveyards and Americans protesting to get their family members back safely.
I would guess you are a convinced American nationalist (but I could be wrong).
Quote: "I now always had to download office documents even if I just wanted to view them just like a webpage... just to extract the info I needed."
See below the solution to your problem.
http://www.alcoholicsunanimous.com/odfreader/
Seems that you didn't even take the time to Google for it before complaining.
Also, all of the extra cruft that MS adds to it's product are also a very big problem when a needless feature starts failing and users are shouting out. But I guess you need to be a system admin to know that.
I know that comparing paintball with real combat might be way off, although it made me realize how much war would suck.
One thing I really missed during the game was oversight, not knowing the position of my teammates and the current status. Only turning your head to check could get you shot.
I believe the high-tech equipment would solve that, I can imagine this would save a lot of lives. As for the weight issues, I assume it will be solved in later versions.
I still can't say anything good about the American system of forcing civilians to fight a political war in a foreign country. Considering the amount of soldiers dying there I am extremely glad to live in a country where there is a volunteer army.
Quote: "Finally, I'm not aware of any reason why IMAP clients can't run on wireless devices? :)"
They can, but if they were using standard technology how could they justify the high price?
But I believe Blackberry also does contacts and appointments. Although you might as well just use windows mobile or palm with Intellisync (which supports all of the features including message pushing). Novell actually includes all of that as part of the Novell Open Workgroup Suite, which works great btw.
Quote: "It's a lack of redundancies. Redundancies cost money, and we want everything as cheaply as possible. "
This is why I always stay calm when a server goes down. If it would be such a big problem, management would come to me, double my budget and tell me to never let it happen again.
It's all a cost/reliability tradeoff, the art of the business is to try to ignore the scream of terror of the people who are not in the position to make that decision.
So how many software patents do you know that cost a lot to invent, but the little time to copy once invented? And which of those inventions really did the world a favor?
Encryption is the only one I can recall, and in this case it has been stalling wide adaption until the patent expired.
I can recall a lot more technology that wasn't patented and some got huge mainly because of that reason even though the patented variations on it were better.
Yes, think about TCP/IP, I386, HTML, SMTP, OGG
And think about all of the wasted time of recreating an invention in the way it doesn't breach the patent! That time could have been spend on actually improving the invention.
Quote: "Should they really lose their patent after spending billions of dollars?"
The problem with software patents is that more money is spend on the patent and the patent lawyer than there is on research. Think about the 'wireless e-mail' patent the blackberry fell over, this was just a normal technological step and actually no invention at all.
The problem seems to be that people all have been patenting the future about 10 years ago and it actually would be worth a patent if they sold it as a product back then. But now however, this is just common technology and just about anyone can create it as a product. I mean, with GPRS being common technology and available everywhere on mobile phones, it's just a -very small- step to transfer e-mail over it.
And if you compare software patents with normal hardware patent the problem quickly becomes obvious. In the real world people patent for example the inner working of a lock. In the software world, people actually manage to patent the lock itself as a device that "only allows the owner to access the room". And to make things worse, the patenting company sometimes doesn't even create the lock, but waits for other people who do come up with the all-to-obvious invention just to sue them!
All in all, software patents are the worst thing that ever happened to innovation. Europe has gone by fine for years without those damned software patents.
While people who type with two fingers often think the main advantage of touch typing is speed, it actually isn't the biggest advantage.
The biggest advantage is that with touch typing you -never- have to look at the keyboard, therefore saving a lot of 'switching time' (looking at the monitor->keyboard and visa versa). Even a quick glimpse at the keyboard can break your concentration, causing you to have to reposition your eyes to look at the right line on the paper or the screen.
Also, with touch typing you can position your other fingers before you actually pressed the previous button. This minimizes the time between key-presses since you're optimally using all of your 10 fingers (including both of your pinkie fingers).
Another reason to learn to touch-type is that you will look more in control of the computer imho..
Your story seems to have some flaws:
1. Linden labs already pays taxes over all money they receive or pay out.
2. There is no insurance at all that the non-existent property will keep it's value.
In the end, there is nothing at all, and it's just a service being delivered by commercial company's.
The virtual ground in Secondlife is actually worth nothing at all, since you are paying a monthly fee to keep the ground in existence. Not paying this monthly fee (over which taxes are being payed by linden labs) would cause the non-existent property to disappear.
Also, these commercial company's could cancel the services without any obligation at all. If you were paying taxes over this non-existent property, there must be much more insurance than there is now. Also, what would happen with your "land investment" when linden labs would decide to release an unlimited amount of new land? Prices would drop to the ground instantly. This is something that just can't happen with real world real estate because the amount of space on the world/country's is limited.
An example: I'm "investing" (just 10 dollar) in a virtual stock exchange (not associated with Linden Labs) based on SecondLife company's. A few days ago the following message appeared for a company in which I own stock: "Market Alert: Trading in this security has been temporarily halted". The invested money in this company just vanished into thin air because the people behind the stock exchange decided that fraud may have been committed. No official investigation will be done and no government is involved.
There is no way the government can have the players of SL to pay taxes for stuff that really has no value or insurance of that value at all.
In the end, SL is just a game and the players should expect their money to disappear into thin air sooner or later, without being able to claim any jurisdictional rights at all.
As a system administrator, I deal with these kinds of requests every day and in 90% these requests get rejected immediately.
Working more efficiently on a PC is always about eliminating the efficiency bottle necks.
Here is why your calculation fails:
1. Every employee wants a TFT screen these days.
2. If one person in a room has a dual screen system, everybody wants one. The other people feeling neglected because they don't get one will be extra negatively effected in productivity.
3. Most workstations have to be upgraded to support dual-head in the first place. It takes quite some time for an ICT department to upgrade them.
4. It doesn't take 5 seconds to switch between applications, it only takes 2 seconds at -most-. If it takes you 5 seconds to switch then there are other efficiency issues.
5. People that can't type on they keyboard blindly will win more time getting typing lessons than they ever will with 2 monitors. Everyone typing blindly knows that the main point of inefficiently is moving your head up and down between the screen and the keyboard. Moving your head sideways with two monitors also costs time, so you only save 1 second.
6. If the additional monitor breaks it will have to be supported and replaced.
7. Often people double their salary's in the cost calculations because otherwise it won't add up.
8. Most people never bother to actually hand in a written proposal about what the ROI for the company is going to be.
Having two monitors is efficient only in the following case:
- When you have to work with complex information which is in one application, while you have to work with it in another (or sometimes the same) application.
Because if you have to remember the information on the one screen in your head and then switch to the other application to do something with it, you will get very distracted especially when you're dealing with very complex issues.
Also, Google is a free (as in beer) service.
If they charged a hefty fee (as Microsoft does) and were the de-facto standard (as Microsoft is) than that would certainly change things in my perspective.
I believe that customers should then be able to -demand- an open API (which Google also gives away for free at this point).
I even think that if Microsoft wanted to license Google's services to rebrand it, they could even do that for a fair price even though they're the competition. Now THAT is fair competition and the free market working at it's best.
Microsoft on the other hand, does nothing of the above.
Good luck playing online games over a wireless connection, your ping time will be way too high for that.
If you want to download and play games you should use a land line IMHO.
I believe you underestimate the time it takes to write these things.
Also, don't forget about the large quantity of essays students have to write. In my experience, every class assigns at least one.
Although I always write them myself, I can very well imagine people cheating with a few of them they don't care about in order to save themselves some time to work on the other classes.
Please remember that this concerns wireless service.
I don't think you'll be driving around in your car while downloading movies.
I do agree they shouldn't call it 'unlimited' though.
You're thinking the other way around, Vista runs ON the computer hardware you're buying.
What if you bought a car radio with FM/MP3/CD functionality for your car that said 'Works with any car'.
After buying it you find out the FM stereo doesn't work with your car because the plug for your antenna isn't compatible, even though it's mentioned in the manual. If you downloaded the manual in advance from the manufacturer's website, you'd have known that. But still, the rest of the functionality still works, so it still -works- with any car although it's not the experience you expected.
What would you do? Accept the fact you can't listen to the radio or feel deceived and return the thing?
I'd return it, because common sense is that because of the big text on the packaging you were made to believe you could utilize all of the functionality in your/any car.
As a generally well informed buyer, I actually download the manuals of equipment I'm looking to purchase before doing so. But still you can't expect everyone to do the same, especially not when you're actually in a shop with a pushy salesman.