Hmmm, Interesting but I would never vote for you given the following reasons
::I am a geek - and all geeks are superior to other types of humans. Perhaps this is true, but everyone lives in this world and for my money there is no reason to promote a person just because they are "genetically" superior. I'm concerned about the people that think they know better than I do because they are superior and thus know what is best for me.
::I run Linux. (Distro is kept secret for fear of alienating geek voters) Favoritism anyway, I run Linux, Windows NT, 95, BSD, BSDI, OS2, BEos, HPUX, VMX, MVS, etc, etc. Sounds as if you need more exposure to other systems of doing things. How can you tell if you are using the right platform unless you use other platforms? Unless this is another example of why you are superior.
::I can code C,C++,Pascal,Basic,Visual Basic, HTML and have a rudimentary (very poor) knowledge of Perl. Hmmm, sounds like you have a start, but that is education only, again let's see some experience and results. I have over 50 languages under my belt at this time and more coming down the road, but you are or at least should not agree with everything I say, diversity is important.
::If elected: ::I will destroy Windows - and open the WinNT source.
I use Linux because it fits a need within my requirements not because it's not Windows. Who the fu** cares about destroying Windows? I have no problem using windows for the purposes is suited for, I just don't think it's suited for everything.
And what's this about opening the source? You support government seizing personal property? Sounds like the next thing will be taking money from my paycheck (oops that's already here... Grin)
::I will destroy etoys.com amazon.com and any other.com that is annoying and stupid. As defined by who? you Sounds to me like this is just another CDC bill with you as the decision maker. So how is this changing what we already have in place?
::I will let DeCSS go to the stars (tell DVD guys to go to hell) Not your decision, it's in the court's hands, unless you want to do away with the checks and balances system. Maybe you should be running for geek King? Or geek tyrant?
::I will make the stupids slaves. (This should attract voters.) Ya, but once again how is that different than what we have now? Some group of elites that think that they are superior to others and want to make the decisions for them...
::Note: The above presentation assumes that only smart people vote. Sadly (I am in Minnesota USA) that is not the case - our gov is Jesse "The Body" Ventura (an ex-pro wrestler whos iq ranges from 1 to 5). While literacy tests and like should not be reinstituted how about making a geeks vote count for 2. Obviously Jesse Ventura is stupid, how else could he get elected? Um, good thing I'm going to let you do my thinking for me. Also, first thing I would do if I were you is to make yourself the only voting member in this new geek society, outlaw other parties and next election only allow votes from the geek society. Damn nothing like voters to screw up a perfectly good election. PS, good thing that you think all the voters in your own election were stupid...
::Yes, I vote... but rarely does the canidate of choice get elected. If it's your choice, than thank goodness they don't get elected.... And to think I was pretty depressed with the whole situation, thanks for showing how much worse it could be.
In all seriousness though, shooting from the hip on this issue is not the best way of interjecting your opinions. I would imagine government under you to be a lot more represive than we have now.
Your statement is FUD. The FOF is dealing with Microsoft as a monopoly and the unfair business practices they used. This is past tense and deals with a specific period of time.
Even if Microsoft's monopoly is challenged now or in the future, not that I am saying it will be, Microsoft still has to answer to the charges that have been brought against it.
In other words, if you go out and kill someone and later you go to trial an effective defense would not be that you are not currently murdering someone.
Nope, Sorry until id releases these binaries themselves distributing the binaries is illegal. Take a look at the license agreement in the linux download, it says something to the fact that the binaries may be distributed but you still need to purchase the game.
That license is only for Quake 2, I somehow doubt they have packaged that license onto the linux cd's at this time.
Basically, you will have to wait until id releases the binaries.
Note: the id key will work in both windows and linux according to conversations that I have had with Lokigames.
Lando
Re:Thats great but what about other OS's?
on
Quake 1 GPL'ed
·
· Score: 1
These games do not have to be GPL'd, the engine was GPL'd, but doesn't mean that all versions have been GPL'd. John and the rest of the id team can not retroactively remove permissions or add permission to a contract... unless the other person agrees.
Even now, John suggests that everyone should use the GPL'd engine. But if you really want to protect your code, you can contract with id for a different license. As the copywrite owner id can release the engine however they see fit.
John has been releasing the source code for all of his games a year after moving to a new engine. He had originally intended to ship out the quake source code last Christmas if I remember correctly. So he is a year late, but yeah I'd definately say that he is one of the good guys.
He releases his code. I wish a couple of other gaming companies would do the same. He also contributes to other open source projects. If you want you can bitch about how poor his code is, but having looked through the code now, I'm suprized at how clean it actually is, but don't bitch that the guy(s) aren't helping out...
I noticed a lot of people saying this is a bad thing. The point out that most of the development is done by people that are not interested in the money and therefore if money is offered these people will back off of development.
Personally, I think this is bogus. I'm working into development under the Linux platform after several years working on the operations and management side of the business. I've decided that I want to do developement that is what I enjoy.
So does that mean I am taking work on Co-Source? No, I look through the lists and see if there is anything I've produced or could produce quickly that would allow me to make a few bucks, but what I am using it for is small portions of code that I need developed to go into my bigger application.
Not sure if that is too clear, let me give a further example. I have a project I am currently working on that requires some Windoze coding. I do not know enough about Windoze in order to do the work myself, though I know that the actual implementation of the code would not be very difficult. My project requires this code, so I have a couple of choices. I can open the project prematurely and hope to attract a windows programer, ala netscape, or I can hire a windows programer to write the code for me. Now, the chief problem with both methods is exposure. How many windows developers do you think read freshmeat? I would say few. So I see this as a way of giving a few bucks to a program to create a basic design which I can build apon. Further, if the programer is really interested in the larger project I am working on, he can join the group after he develops his small bit of code.
Co-Source is more than anything like a discussion group where people can talk about what kind of things they would like to see. If someone has to make a choice between doing some extra work to make some money, or working on a open source project for a little cash this method offers incentive or at least tips the scales in our favor.
Furthermore, say I have a neat idea. I don't have the knowledge to implement or to have it developed myself. But if I post the idea and others like the idea as well, they can help me pay for it.
Collective bargaining, seems to me I've heard that phrase before. Now whether you like unions or not, the fact is collective bargaining gives a group of people more power than any single person.
Ok summary. I think that for a lot of the small developers out there either commercial or open source, myself being the latter, can use this method to get pieces of code done. Also this is a site where people can interact with each other to help out a developer financially without having to finance the whole project themselves.
Look, if I want a network driver supported by Linux it would cost me a lot to hire someone to have it done. I could wait for someone to do the work and I might even notice when the work was done if I watched the news groups. But if I can post the request and put in 20 dollars and 50 other people like the request and put in 20 dollars each. The developer gets enough to feed himself this week and Linux gets a new driver.
If you think this is a bad thing, that's fine with me, but personally I think this is a good idea.
Lando
PS. I like cosource much better than SourceXchange because it empowers the comunitee to make small donations to developers and push our own ajenda. SourceXchange is for the big boys to push their ajenda because there is only 1 sponsor for a given project. But both will produce GPL code for the entire communitee to use and I fail to see that as a bad thing.
1) Very well done video, this guy if working alone did a good job.
2) Seems more like a Hate Crime propoganda piece to actually stir up trouble.
3) The clip is Blair witch like, at least as I understand the movie was haven't seen it myself. No real hard talk about why and how things will be done, but a lot of inuendo.
4) I've concluded that the article is likely to be fabricated, ie it is my opinion, at this time ie always subject to change, that the thing is a hoax. Still waiting on confirmation from the artist to post the information as a mirror.
Hmmm, Hosting... Well seeing as there is not an actual court order having to do with this, I would be able to host the site as well. If my ISP, grin, shuts me down I'll just sue them for breach of contract, ie my provider is a common carrier.
Ack.... Well, there goes my hosting of open source projects. And heck, while I'm at it guess I'll drop my own projects on their server, save me some admin hassel.
This looks to be a serious, shattering even development. Anything wrong with the way things are set up? I read the docs and I can't see anything wrong at this time.
Sorry, Got a little excited. I've been waiting for this release. And just threw the file on one of my sites. I'll leave it up until the feeding frenzy is over.
Nod, Sorry misread your comments. Shouldn't be too hard to do though. Now that mount is working, ie no longer smbmount, I would think that it would be fairly easy. Just live nfs has virtual connections that kick off when they are used.
Hmmm, Couple of comments. First I should not that I haven't read the paper. I have seen papers like this in the past and expect to see more in the future. Second, I should not that I have worked for AT&T and have been actively involved with modems and data transmitions since the early 80's. Third, I currently do not own stock and am not employee'd by a telecommunications company. That said...
Deregulation of the cable services just took place this year. June or July I think. The big problem for most of the litigation against ATT at the moment is from "grassroots" organizations that somehow seem to be orginized and paid for by the baby bell's.
The way I see it, and until I see something different is this. The baby bells still have monopolies in their regions. Allowing high speed data connections via cable breaks their monopoly and they want to stop this. Consider, DSL technology has been available since '91 as an effecient and cost effective way of transfering information. I have been waiting since that time for DSL to hit the market, but it never has. Then Cable modems start hitting the market. All of a sudden DSL is available at prices comparable to cable modems.
Now something here strikes me as odd. Why sit on technology for 7 years? Well let's talk about my T1 line. Theoretically DSL should be able to transfer T1 like rates of information over standard copper. However DSL is what $80.00 a month and my T1 costs me in the neighborhood of $1600.00 a month unless I lock myself into some pretty sever contracts (yeah I have done so) This is what the baby bells fear. ATT has been a frontrunner of new tech for a long time. With divestiture it has intensified.
Now being an ex-employee I have seen the changes the CEO (Armstrong) is making and if I were the baby bells I would be scared to. They want to milk as much money as they can and cable modems threaten them. In the past the cable modems were not implemented because the companies didn't have enough money to make a real go of it. Plus they had monopolies and cable was/is just a cash cow to them. I try to get my cable company on the phone and they never answer, yet when I move to a new apartment they are real quick to respond... Hmmm.
Anyway, I say if it's going to lower the cost of communications let ATT go for it. What we need to be focusing on is getting more right of way access for other companies and not allowing counties and city planners to only allow 1 phone company, and 1 cable company access your house.
Open up the right of ways and give att competition. Rather than using the same lines as ATT does and thus limiting the infrastructure. Frankly, give me DSL, OC3, Cablemodems, satellite TV, Wireless, microwave. All these techs are available and if I don't like ATT's service and I have to pay $5 a month more for a wireless system fine. That is what competition is about.
This really comes down to the baby bells getting scared someone will compete for local phone service and data connections so that they cannot milk their customers. AOL has a different problem with ATT and the ISP, but that is beyond this article, though I don't believe they have any better justification than the bells.
My point is that these people want to protect their turf or get a free ride on the back of ATT. ATT when it bought the cable companies paid approx $4000 for each customer these companies had. That's a lot of money. They intend to spend billions upgrading the network and frankly I think they will do it, but if they are forced to allow access to other companies at a fraction of the cost it took to upgrade the network ATT won't be able to justify the expense. Hense no cable modems therefore the baby bells retain their stranglehold over data communications and they can keep ripping me off!
No, the judge does not appear to be slanted. He speaks very fairly and points out facts. There is little that can be construde as opinion. He expresses his conclusions and how he reaches them.
Please, read the document, it is very user friendly.
Interestingly enough, it took me 4 1/2 hours to read the entire document. I guess I must be slow because of all the responses I see posted at 7:30 pm.
Sigh.. Anyway, one of the points, in fact the main point that the judge brings up in his documentation is the fact that Microsoft did this because it was scared. Not scared of a browser or that people could use the browser to view web pages, but the fact that the browser allowed access to api's that would make program written on it write once and run anywhere. And yes I am purposely using java's motto, because the judge does.
Java and Navigator both made api's available to programmers allowing other programs to be designed on the top of their systems. This was not bad in microsoft's view. What was bad was that these programs who run on other OS's without having to do significant revisions. Porting would be simple. And that is why Microsoft attacked them.
Other companies are mentioned, but the major topic was Microsoft's, specifically Bill's decision, that Netscape was a competitor. Almost the entire article then shows how Microsoft set about to destroy them. Always stopping just short of being illegal, or at least usually stopping, but the intent was there and that is what he is showing.
Specifically, that by Microsoft attempting to protect it's marketshare has had a negative effect on innovation and customer worth. Going so far as to say that customers where forced to upgrade to 98 to get new hardware support but also receiving and inferrior (sp?) product.
This is paraphasing of course.
I do agree with other posts, this judge has Microsoft nailed. He gets it.
I want to tell everyone that the language is not technical (legaleze) it's very readable. Definately tech, but this judge wants everyone to understand what is going on and he make a dam* good presentation of the facts that anyone can understand or at least get the guist of.
He clears Microsoft of a couple of charges but does basically say that Microsoft is a monopoly and has used it's position to unfairly influence the market to retain that position.
Other than that, I was astounded at complexity of Microsoft's plan. I can see why they figured they could walk circles around the judge, they are very, very slick. As a matter of fact I have a whole new appreciation for Bill. He is incredibly intellegent and has a few good people working for him. I can see that he has some normal executives, but he and the sharp ones are the ones that control the company.
I wouldn't mind having some of that knowledge. Being a tech though I pretty much say things as they are and try to be fair. Probably why I am saddled with a money losing business, which don't get me wrong I love, and Gates is the riches man in the world at least until Monday.
Stop for a second and think about what you are saying... AoL this and AoL that you can't blame the lack of a browser on AOL.
The code is there, available. Join in, beta the code, work on the code if you have the knowledge. Help with the documentation.
I believe Dave is right, but remember that AOL is not in the driver's seat. They are helping fund this project, but they are already throwing a lot of weight behind it. The only reason this project will fail, (fork, fork, fork) is if the community does not jump in and give enough support.
AOL is still the same shi**y company that we ragged on for years, just because they bought out netscape doesn't make them any better than Microsoft. Be the code has been released and they are helping to fund the rework on it. The community has to become involved.
Use ODBC to pull your information from the Access Database. Use the DBI module under perl. Installing mod-perl is pretty simple, but if you are not real familier you might want to just set it up as a standard cgi.
Somehow this reminds me of the guy that claimed that he could get a lot more ip addresses out of the current IPv4. He showed a lot of figures, mathmatics, and poor writing skills. This article seems to be the same. "Microsoft is bad because it has too much money, sell your stock now"
WTF??? Article doesn't show any facts or show proof of facts, just makes assertions and tries to show it's valid by associating itself with prominent figures.. No Dice.
John, I've been following your exploits, grin, for the last couple of years. One of the comments that benefited me the most was your suggestiong to read the Graphics Programming Blackbook by Micheal Abrash(sp?). Could you give a list of books that you consider excellent source material for someone that is looking and doing high end programming. Both graphical and non-graphical.
Been sitting here deciding what I would write. Finished a rough outline and realized that I didn't know what the article should be about. Cyberwarfare? CyberTerrorism? Nuclear weapons in the electronic age???
I went through and noted that a lot of good comments had not been raised... Still sitting at a score of 1 while lesser comments had been raised to 3's and above.
Seeing that this is the trend and being that I have already spent too much time on this article for no compensation, I've decided not to do a follow-up article. It looks like they have more then enough quotes from the group as a whole that mine are not neccessary.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmm,
.com that is annoying and stupid.
Interesting but I would never vote for you given the following reasons
::I am a geek - and all geeks are superior to other types of humans.
Perhaps this is true, but everyone lives in this world and for my money there is no reason to promote a person just because they are "genetically" superior. I'm concerned about the people that think they know better than I do because they are superior and thus know what is best for me.
::I run Linux. (Distro is kept secret for fear of alienating geek voters)
Favoritism anyway, I run Linux, Windows NT, 95, BSD, BSDI, OS2, BEos, HPUX, VMX, MVS, etc, etc. Sounds as if you need more exposure to other systems of doing things. How can you tell if you are using the right platform unless you use other platforms? Unless this is another example of why you are superior.
::I can code C,C++,Pascal,Basic,Visual Basic, HTML and have a rudimentary (very poor) knowledge of Perl.
Hmmm, sounds like you have a start, but that is education only, again let's see some experience and results. I have over 50 languages under my belt at this time and more coming down the road, but you are or at least should not agree with everything I say, diversity is important.
::If elected:
::I will destroy Windows - and open the WinNT source.
I use Linux because it fits a need within my requirements not because it's not Windows. Who the fu** cares about destroying Windows? I have no problem using windows for the purposes is suited for, I just don't think it's suited for everything.
And what's this about opening the source? You support government seizing personal property? Sounds like the next thing will be taking money from my paycheck (oops that's already here... Grin)
::I will destroy etoys.com amazon.com and any other
As defined by who? you Sounds to me like this is just another CDC bill with you as the decision maker. So how is this changing what we already have in place?
::I will let DeCSS go to the stars (tell DVD guys to go to hell)
Not your decision, it's in the court's hands, unless you want to do away with the checks and balances system. Maybe you should be running for geek King? Or geek tyrant?
::I will make the stupids slaves. (This should attract voters.)
Ya, but once again how is that different than what we have now? Some group of elites that think that they are superior to others and want to make the decisions for them...
::Note: The above presentation assumes that only smart people vote. Sadly (I am in Minnesota USA) that is not the case - our gov is Jesse "The Body" Ventura (an ex-pro wrestler whos iq ranges from 1 to 5). While literacy tests and like should not be reinstituted how about making a geeks vote count for 2.
Obviously Jesse Ventura is stupid, how else could he get elected? Um, good thing I'm going to let you do my thinking for me. Also, first thing I would do if I were you is to make yourself the only voting member in this new geek society, outlaw other parties and next election only allow votes from the geek society. Damn nothing like voters to screw up a perfectly good election. PS, good thing that you think all the voters in your own election were stupid...
::Yes, I vote... but rarely does the canidate of choice get elected.
If it's your choice, than thank goodness they don't get elected.... And to think I was pretty depressed with the whole situation, thanks for showing how much worse it could be.
In all seriousness though, shooting from the hip on this issue is not the best way of interjecting your opinions. I would imagine government under you to be a lot more represive than we have now.
Lando
Your statement is FUD. The FOF is dealing with Microsoft as a monopoly and the unfair business practices they used. This is past tense and deals with a specific period of time.
Even if Microsoft's monopoly is challenged now or in the future, not that I am saying it will be, Microsoft still has to answer to the charges that have been brought against it.
In other words, if you go out and kill someone and later you go to trial an effective defense would not be that you are not currently murdering someone.
Lando
Ummm,
Check the article it's a British gov thing, not a US Gov thing.
Lano
Nope,
Sorry until id releases these binaries themselves distributing the binaries is illegal. Take a look at the license agreement in the linux download, it says something to the fact that the binaries may be distributed but you still need to purchase the game.
That license is only for Quake 2, I somehow doubt they have packaged that license onto the linux cd's at this time.
Basically, you will have to wait until id releases the binaries.
Note: the id key will work in both windows and linux according to conversations that I have had with Lokigames.
Lando
These games do not have to be GPL'd, the engine was GPL'd, but doesn't mean that all versions have been GPL'd. John and the rest of the id team can not retroactively remove permissions or add permission to a contract... unless the other person agrees.
Even now, John suggests that everyone should use the GPL'd engine. But if you really want to protect your code, you can contract with id for a different license. As the copywrite owner id can release the engine however they see fit.
Lando
John has been releasing the source code for all of his games a year after moving to a new engine. He had originally intended to ship out the quake source code last Christmas if I remember correctly. So he is a year late, but yeah I'd definately say that he is one of the good guys.
He releases his code. I wish a couple of other gaming companies would do the same. He also contributes to other open source projects. If you want you can bitch about how poor his code is, but having looked through the code now, I'm suprized at how clean it actually is, but don't bitch that the guy(s) aren't helping out...
Lando
I noticed a lot of people saying this is a bad thing. The point out that most of the development is done by people that are not interested in the money and therefore if money is offered these people will back off of development.
Personally, I think this is bogus. I'm working into development under the Linux platform after several years working on the operations and management side of the business. I've decided that I want to do developement that is what I enjoy.
So does that mean I am taking work on Co-Source? No, I look through the lists and see if there is anything I've produced or could produce quickly that would allow me to make a few bucks, but what I am using it for is small portions of code that I need developed to go into my bigger application.
Not sure if that is too clear, let me give a further example. I have a project I am currently working on that requires some Windoze coding. I do not know enough about Windoze in order to do the work myself, though I know that the actual implementation of the code would not be very difficult. My project requires this code, so I have a couple of choices. I can open the project prematurely and hope to attract a windows programer, ala netscape, or I can hire a windows programer to write the code for me. Now, the chief problem with both methods is exposure. How many windows developers do you think read freshmeat? I would say few. So I see this as a way of giving a few bucks to a program to create a basic design which I can build apon. Further, if the programer is really interested in the larger project I am working on, he can join the group after he develops his small bit of code.
Co-Source is more than anything like a discussion group where people can talk about what kind of things they would like to see. If someone has to make a choice between doing some extra work to make some money, or working on a open source project for a little cash this method offers incentive or at least tips the scales in our favor.
Furthermore, say I have a neat idea. I don't have the knowledge to implement or to have it developed myself. But if I post the idea and others like the idea as well, they can help me pay for it.
Collective bargaining, seems to me I've heard that phrase before. Now whether you like unions or not, the fact is collective bargaining gives a group of people more power than any single person.
Ok summary. I think that for a lot of the small developers out there either commercial or open source, myself being the latter, can use this method to get pieces of code done. Also this is a site where people can interact with each other to help out a developer financially without having to finance the whole project themselves.
Look, if I want a network driver supported by Linux it would cost me a lot to hire someone to have it done. I could wait for someone to do the work and I might even notice when the work was done if I watched the news groups. But if I can post the request and put in 20 dollars and 50 other people like the request and put in 20 dollars each. The developer gets enough to feed himself this week and Linux gets a new driver.
If you think this is a bad thing, that's fine with me, but personally I think this is a good idea.
Lando
PS. I like cosource much better than SourceXchange because it empowers the comunitee to make small donations to developers and push our own ajenda. SourceXchange is for the big boys to push their ajenda because there is only 1 sponsor for a given project. But both will produce GPL code for the entire communitee to use and I fail to see that as a bad thing.
I have seen mention that id will release the Linux drivers for the game so that you can play on a linux box using your windows cd.
My question... Are they going to release the windows exe files as well so that I can play on windows using my linux cd?
Anyone seen anything about this?
Lando
Nod,
Thanks for the link. Notes:
1) Very well done video, this guy if working alone did a good job.
2) Seems more like a Hate Crime propoganda piece to actually stir up trouble.
3) The clip is Blair witch like, at least as I understand the movie was haven't seen it myself. No real hard talk about why and how things will be done, but a lot of inuendo.
4) I've concluded that the article is likely to be fabricated, ie it is my opinion, at this time ie always subject to change, that the thing is a hoax. Still waiting on confirmation from the artist to post the information as a mirror.
Lando
Hmmm,
Hosting... Well seeing as there is not an actual court order having to do with this, I would be able to host the site as well. If my ISP, grin, shuts me down I'll just sue them for breach of contract, ie my provider is a common carrier.
Lando
Ack....
Well, there goes my hosting of open source projects. And heck, while I'm at it guess I'll drop my own projects on their server, save me some admin hassel.
This looks to be a serious, shattering even development. Anything wrong with the way things are set up? I read the docs and I can't see anything wrong at this time.
Lando
Got a little excited. I've been waiting for this release. And just threw the file on one of my sites. I'll leave it up until the feeding frenzy is over.
ftp://www.rtsg.com/pub/samba-2.0.6.tar.gz
Lando
Nod,
Sorry misread your comments. Shouldn't be too hard to do though. Now that mount is working, ie no longer smbmount, I would think that it would be fairly easy. Just live nfs has virtual connections that kick off when they are used.
Lando
The new mounting code for this should be available in this release. Still reading the changes...
/mnt/'the old NT server'/
Once you mount a drive from another machine it's as simple as cd
Done..
ftp://www.rtsg.com/pub
Lando
Hmmm,
Couple of comments. First I should not that I haven't read the paper. I have seen papers like this in the past and expect to see more in the future. Second, I should not that I have worked for AT&T and have been actively involved with modems and data transmitions since the early 80's. Third, I currently do not own stock and am not employee'd by a telecommunications company. That said...
Deregulation of the cable services just took place this year. June or July I think. The big problem for most of the litigation against ATT at the moment is from "grassroots" organizations that somehow seem to be orginized and paid for by the baby bell's.
The way I see it, and until I see something different is this. The baby bells still have monopolies in their regions. Allowing high speed data connections via cable breaks their monopoly and they want to stop this. Consider, DSL technology has been available since '91 as an effecient and cost effective way of transfering information. I have been waiting since that time for DSL to hit the market, but it never has. Then Cable modems start hitting the market. All of a sudden DSL is available at prices comparable to cable modems.
Now something here strikes me as odd. Why sit on technology for 7 years? Well let's talk about my T1 line. Theoretically DSL should be able to transfer T1 like rates of information over standard copper. However DSL is what $80.00 a month and my T1 costs me in the neighborhood of $1600.00 a month unless I lock myself into some pretty sever contracts (yeah I have done so) This is what the baby bells fear. ATT has been a frontrunner of new tech for a long time. With divestiture it has intensified.
Now being an ex-employee I have seen the changes the CEO (Armstrong) is making and if I were the baby bells I would be scared to. They want to milk as much money as they can and cable modems threaten them. In the past the cable modems were not implemented because the companies didn't have enough money to make a real go of it. Plus they had monopolies and cable was/is just a cash cow to them. I try to get my cable company on the phone and they never answer, yet when I move to a new apartment they are real quick to respond... Hmmm.
Anyway, I say if it's going to lower the cost of communications let ATT go for it. What we need to be focusing on is getting more right of way access for other companies and not allowing counties and city planners to only allow 1 phone company, and 1 cable company access your house.
Open up the right of ways and give att competition. Rather than using the same lines as ATT does and thus limiting the infrastructure. Frankly, give me DSL, OC3, Cablemodems, satellite TV, Wireless, microwave. All these techs are available and if I don't like ATT's service and I have to pay $5 a month more for a wireless system fine. That is what competition is about.
This really comes down to the baby bells getting scared someone will compete for local phone service and data connections so that they cannot milk their customers. AOL has a different problem with ATT and the ISP, but that is beyond this article, though I don't believe they have any better justification than the bells.
My point is that these people want to protect their turf or get a free ride on the back of ATT. ATT when it bought the cable companies paid approx $4000 for each customer these companies had. That's a lot of money. They intend to spend billions upgrading the network and frankly I think they will do it, but if they are forced to allow access to other companies at a fraction of the cost it took to upgrade the network ATT won't be able to justify the expense. Hense no cable modems therefore the baby bells retain their stranglehold over data communications and they can keep ripping me off!
Not that I have an opinion on this or anything.
Grin
Lando
No, the judge does not appear to be slanted. He speaks very fairly and points out facts. There is little that can be construde as opinion. He expresses his conclusions and how he reaches them.
Please, read the document, it is very user friendly.
Lando
Interestingly enough, it took me 4 1/2 hours to read the entire document. I guess I must be slow because of all the responses I see posted at 7:30 pm.
Sigh.. Anyway, one of the points, in fact the main point that the judge brings up in his documentation is the fact that Microsoft did this because it was scared. Not scared of a browser or that people could use the browser to view web pages, but the fact that the browser allowed access to api's that would make program written on it write once and run anywhere. And yes I am purposely using java's motto, because the judge does.
Java and Navigator both made api's available to programmers allowing other programs to be designed on the top of their systems. This was not bad in microsoft's view. What was bad was that these programs who run on other OS's without having to do significant revisions. Porting would be simple. And that is why Microsoft attacked them.
Other companies are mentioned, but the major topic was Microsoft's, specifically Bill's decision, that Netscape was a competitor. Almost the entire article then shows how Microsoft set about to destroy them. Always stopping just short of being illegal, or at least usually stopping, but the intent was there and that is what he is showing.
Specifically, that by Microsoft attempting to protect it's marketshare has had a negative effect on innovation and customer worth. Going so far as to say that customers where forced to upgrade to 98 to get new hardware support but also receiving and inferrior (sp?) product.
This is paraphasing of course.
I do agree with other posts, this judge has Microsoft nailed. He gets it.
I want to tell everyone that the language is not technical (legaleze) it's very readable. Definately tech, but this judge wants everyone to understand what is going on and he make a dam* good presentation of the facts that anyone can understand or at least get the guist of.
He clears Microsoft of a couple of charges but does basically say that Microsoft is a monopoly and has used it's position to unfairly influence the market to retain that position.
Other than that, I was astounded at complexity of Microsoft's plan. I can see why they figured they could walk circles around the judge, they are very, very slick. As a matter of fact I have a whole new appreciation for Bill. He is incredibly intellegent and has a few good people working for him. I can see that he has some normal executives, but he and the sharp ones are the ones that control the company.
I wouldn't mind having some of that knowledge. Being a tech though I pretty much say things as they are and try to be fair. Probably why I am saddled with a money losing business, which don't get me wrong I love, and Gates is the riches man in the world at least until Monday.
Grin
Lando
Stop for a second and think about what you are saying... AoL this and AoL that you can't blame the lack of a browser on AOL.
The code is there, available. Join in, beta the code, work on the code if you have the knowledge. Help with the documentation.
I believe Dave is right, but remember that AOL is not in the driver's seat. They are helping fund this project, but they are already throwing a lot of weight behind it. The only reason this project will fail, (fork, fork, fork) is if the community does not jump in and give enough support.
AOL is still the same shi**y company that we ragged on for years, just because they bought out netscape doesn't make them any better than Microsoft. Be the code has been released and they are helping to fund the rework on it. The community has to become involved.
Lando
Use ODBC to pull your information from the Access Database. Use the DBI module under perl. Installing mod-perl is pretty simple, but if you are not real familier you might want to just set it up as a standard cgi.
Lando
http://www.people.cornell.edu/ pages/tg21/recharging/
This page describes his theory and offers insight into it. Impressive read.
Lando
Pulled a website that seems to have more information http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/tg21/
Lando
Somehow this reminds me of the guy that claimed that he could get a lot more ip addresses out of the current IPv4. He showed a lot of figures, mathmatics, and poor writing skills. This article seems to be the same. "Microsoft is bad because it has too much money, sell your stock now"
WTF??? Article doesn't show any facts or show proof of facts, just makes assertions and tries to show it's valid by associating itself with prominent figures.. No Dice.
Lando
John,
I've been following your exploits, grin, for the last couple of years. One of the comments that benefited me the most was your suggestiong to read the Graphics Programming Blackbook by Micheal Abrash(sp?). Could you give a list of books that you consider excellent source material for someone that is looking and doing high end programming. Both graphical and non-graphical.
Sincerely,
Kal Kolberg
aka Lando
Been sitting here deciding what I would write. Finished a rough outline and realized that I didn't know what the article should be about. Cyberwarfare? CyberTerrorism? Nuclear weapons in the electronic age???
I went through and noted that a lot of good comments had not been raised... Still sitting at a score of 1 while lesser comments had been raised to 3's and above.
Seeing that this is the trend and being that I have already spent too much time on this article for no compensation, I've decided not to do a follow-up article. It looks like they have more then enough quotes from the group as a whole that mine are not neccessary.
Sincerely,
Lando