I find it interesting that he uses the phrase "my guys".
I don't really find this odd at all. If you like your company/friends/coworkers you tend to identify them as "yours". I wold imagine since he has worked there for 18 years there are probably many people there that would be like family. Anything that is part of so large a chunk is bound to become personal - heck, you'd probably refer to "my wife/husband" instead of Mr/Mrs Doe after a much shorter period.
What about the other commercial vendors though? Don't they force "your guys" to do a great job? I mean the development efforts of MS have been driven by apple and google more then anything else. Like clockwork windows implements two year old apple technology and adopts the latest apple GUI paradigms.
Yes, that is his point entirely. He wants to have healthy competition because he feels that Microsoft does it's best work when they have serious competitors. The part I paraphrased was specifically about open source software, but he does discuss competition in general and the whole "healthy ecosystem" (and makes fun of himself for using that term) thing being good for business.
Also, just to give them a little benefit of the doubt, I think Vista has been in development for more than two years. So it's conceivable that they aren't "stealing" Apple's ideas, for example, but that Apple just beat them in releasing those features. I'm not saying that it's necessarily the case, but I don't think people should be so quick to condem - good features are good features.
Slashdot gets a mention around the 37 minute mark (paraphrase)
Slashdot is kinda gratuitously over the top. On the other hand, there is great content there too - great minds go to Slashdot....Really, you could argue about the signal to noise ratio, but it's definitely not zero.
Actually, so far he seems to have a relatively objective perspective. Obviously he likes Microsoft (he does work there) but his perspective on OSS is interesting (somewhat paraphrasing):
I like open source..I'm a great fan of Stallman's....I think open source has definitely a place in the world and that linux has a place in the world and I hope linux continues to do a great job, and do you know why? Because to the extent that Linux does a great job it forces my guys to do a great job.
Still in the process of watching it, but he has interesting perspective on Windows 95 and it's role as a bridge from 16bit to 32bit programs. He also points out that though it wasnt the best OS they knew how to make at the time (points at NT) it was the best release of Windows that Microsoft ever did (in his opinion).
Whether you agree or disagree, it's an interesting look at Microsoft over (nearly) the past two decades.
From the article you linked (which is informative):
"MySpace is more concerned about making money than protecting children online," Adam Loewy, who is representing the girl and her mother in the lawsuit against MySpace, told the newspaper.
Sounds like the same could be said for her mother.
Although it's easy to be cynical, I find it seriously hard to believe that a teenaged girl would intentionally put herself into a situation where she gets sexually assaulted just so she can sue myspace. I don't think things have gone that far (yet).
I'm pretty sure Microsoft has had double digit revenue growth for many years (including the past several). Microsoft has been bringing in over 10 billion a quarter recently, I believe. They are spending more right now, though. A lot of it is investing into new products like Live, etc that are expensive investments but could payoff in the long run.
I would tend to agree with you. Sadly, right or wrong, this seems to be the norm for patents these days, and the 'good' and 'evil' , big and small will continue to screwed until it gets changed.
I meant source code. How else can infringement be proven?
Well, the patent concerns a "method of linking its Access database and Excel" - this probably wouldn't need source code to prove. This sounds like a patent on an idea regarding how to implement something - so the feature itself could be infringing instead of the specifics of coding that feature. The article doesnt really go into much detail on what the patent actually entails.
With respect to them recommending that they update, of course Microsoft will - I'm not sure I understand how this is a big deal. If Microsoft didn't ask people to upgrade and remove the offending feature, it could probably be used against them in court. Some sort of willful infringement (I'm not a lawyer, shrug)? I fail to see how this justifies the number of !'s you're using here - another patch from Microsoft is certainly nothing to be shocked at:) I'm sure those that don't want to apply the Service Pack in question (I'm sure it contains other patches/fixes as well) wont have to.
Sorry to keep following you around....but this is your third rediculous post on this story.
Your first question seems offtopic - a 3rd party can get access to portions of Office by buying it. Unless you mean the source code, which doesn't necessarily have to be involved for Microsoft to be infringing a patent.
To your second question, from your own quote "Tt was recently decided in a court of law that certain portions of code...". Microsoft isn't conceding anything. They are merely stating the fact that a court has decided that they are infringing. For further evidence of them not conceding anything, please refer to the article you are posting to - it's about Microsoft appealing _that_ decision.
Lastly, where are you getting this forced upgrade information from? Certainly not from your quote: "As a result, Microsoft must make available a revised version". Make available != forced upgrade. Also, in terms of licensing this patent, I could personally see them not wanting to do that because it seems pretty trivial - at least from the description in the article (you know, that thing you should've read).
Why should USERS pay to upgrade to a new version? Why can't Microsoft license the patent in question, instead?
I'd imagine that's referring to a patch and not something that costs money. Unless you're referring to the human cost of having to patch X copies of Office. Then again, I doubt that Microsoft cares if people actually upgrade - it's probably just important (for legal reasons I imagine) that they _ask_ people to.
Nice trolling; I'll bite. There are a couple problems with that:
a)This case has nothing to do with Vista. The patent is related to with some sort of communication between Access and Excel (sounds kinda bunk to me)
b)I don't think that a $65 million lawsuit (and this isn't even necessarily for that much) would make a decent significant enough in Microsoft to cause the resignation of Bill Gates...
Morrison & Foerster said it is hoping that the federal court will award Amado further damages for continuing infringement, out of an escrow account that now has more than $65 million in it.
The lawyers appear to be hoping for more, but it hasn't necessarily been increased to $65 million yet. Personally, I don't think it's worth that much, since the infringing technology is related to:
Microsoft's method of linking its Access database and Excel spreadsheet infringed on Amado's technology
The "casual players" need to learn that they in no way NEED that much gold to play online.
This is one of the problems, as I see it. You don't need that much money, and yet it keeps rolling in. My character currently has over 700g (which isn't that much compared to some) - not from farming, just from playing - and I don't really have anything to spend it on. The really great gear in the game drops in instances and isn't going to cost you a single gold. This is why there is so much inflation in the game - people who have been 60 forever and have nothing better to do than dump gold on alternate characters, making low level, decent gear skyrocket in price.
As a bit of addendum, I feel like pointing out that Blizzard's game design basically encourages farming. The way things have been moving lately is more and more towards "reputation" based rewards. Meaning, basically, that you kill the same enemies over and over again to eventually (many thousands of kills later) get something cool. It seems pretty stupid to ban some people for farming when that's basically what Blizzard is designing the game to be.
[GM]Dave>> Pulling!!! ----> Shirt! [GM]Dave>> Heading back to camp. Susan>> Ready here. Susan>> (( Ready to Start Skillchain! )) Susan>> (( Can I have it? )) [GM]Dave>> Oh, yeah, baby. [GM]Dave>> (( Turn your party flag on. ))
Oh, I forgot - having/exploiting a monopoly is a mortal sin that no amount of penance could ever attone for. Heck, he's given away 1/3 of his fortune (see other posts) to charity, but that means nothing since he used his OS monopoly to sell other products and because we all know that _software_ is the ultimate measure of good or evil.
Too bad their is no moderation for +1 Self-righteous prick - I think that would be more appropriate.
I'm not sure what your usage has to do with his experience....I personally find (in absolute numbers) that Firefox crashes more often than IE. But I, like you, tend to use Firefox far more often. That may change when IE 7 is released - I'm starting to like the beta more than Firefox - but there are a few little touches that have prevented me from switching yet.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't really find this odd at all. If you like your company/friends/coworkers you tend to identify them as "yours". I wold imagine since he has worked there for 18 years there are probably many people there that would be like family. Anything that is part of so large a chunk is bound to become personal - heck, you'd probably refer to "my wife/husband" instead of Mr/Mrs Doe after a much shorter period.
Yes, that is his point entirely. He wants to have healthy competition because he feels that Microsoft does it's best work when they have serious competitors. The part I paraphrased was specifically about open source software, but he does discuss competition in general and the whole "healthy ecosystem" (and makes fun of himself for using that term) thing being good for business.
Also, just to give them a little benefit of the doubt, I think Vista has been in development for more than two years. So it's conceivable that they aren't "stealing" Apple's ideas, for example, but that Apple just beat them in releasing those features. I'm not saying that it's necessarily the case, but I don't think people should be so quick to condem - good features are good features.
He must be new here...:)
Still in the process of watching it, but he has interesting perspective on Windows 95 and it's role as a bridge from 16bit to 32bit programs. He also points out that though it wasnt the best OS they knew how to make at the time (points at NT) it was the best release of Windows that Microsoft ever did (in his opinion). Whether you agree or disagree, it's an interesting look at Microsoft over (nearly) the past two decades.
Sounds like the same could be said for her mother.
/cynical
Although it's easy to be cynical, I find it seriously hard to believe that a teenaged girl would intentionally put herself into a situation where she gets sexually assaulted just so she can sue myspace. I don't think things have gone that far (yet).
OMG, $30 million worth of ponies!!!111one
I'm pretty sure Microsoft has had double digit revenue growth for many years (including the past several). Microsoft has been bringing in over 10 billion a quarter recently, I believe. They are spending more right now, though. A lot of it is investing into new products like Live, etc that are expensive investments but could payoff in the long run.
I would tend to agree with you. Sadly, right or wrong, this seems to be the norm for patents these days, and the 'good' and 'evil' , big and small will continue to screwed until it gets changed.
You mean that borg picture doesn't represent the average slashdot reader?!
Well, the patent concerns a "method of linking its Access database and Excel" - this probably wouldn't need source code to prove. This sounds like a patent on an idea regarding how to implement something - so the feature itself could be infringing instead of the specifics of coding that feature. The article doesnt really go into much detail on what the patent actually entails.
With respect to them recommending that they update, of course Microsoft will - I'm not sure I understand how this is a big deal. If Microsoft didn't ask people to upgrade and remove the offending feature, it could probably be used against them in court. Some sort of willful infringement (I'm not a lawyer, shrug)? I fail to see how this justifies the number of !'s you're using here - another patch from Microsoft is certainly nothing to be shocked at :) I'm sure those that don't want to apply the Service Pack in question (I'm sure it contains other patches/fixes as well) wont have to.
Your first question seems offtopic - a 3rd party can get access to portions of Office by buying it. Unless you mean the source code, which doesn't necessarily have to be involved for Microsoft to be infringing a patent.
To your second question, from your own quote "Tt was recently decided in a court of law that certain portions of code...". Microsoft isn't conceding anything. They are merely stating the fact that a court has decided that they are infringing. For further evidence of them not conceding anything, please refer to the article you are posting to - it's about Microsoft appealing _that_ decision.
Lastly, where are you getting this forced upgrade information from? Certainly not from your quote: "As a result, Microsoft must make available a revised version". Make available != forced upgrade. Also, in terms of licensing this patent, I could personally see them not wanting to do that because it seems pretty trivial - at least from the description in the article (you know, that thing you should've read).
:'(
I'd imagine that's referring to a patch and not something that costs money. Unless you're referring to the human cost of having to patch X copies of Office. Then again, I doubt that Microsoft cares if people actually upgrade - it's probably just important (for legal reasons I imagine) that they _ask_ people to.
a)This case has nothing to do with Vista. The patent is related to with some sort of communication between Access and Excel (sounds kinda bunk to me)
b)I don't think that a $65 million lawsuit (and this isn't even necessarily for that much) would make a decent significant enough in Microsoft to cause the resignation of Bill Gates...
The lawyers appear to be hoping for more, but it hasn't necessarily been increased to $65 million yet. Personally, I don't think it's worth that much, since the infringing technology is related to:
but heck, that's patent law for you.
I thought the same thing....and then I wondered why it took them 2 years to put it together.
Woah, woah, woah. We're still talking about CS, right?
This is one of the problems, as I see it. You don't need that much money, and yet it keeps rolling in. My character currently has over 700g (which isn't that much compared to some) - not from farming, just from playing - and I don't really have anything to spend it on. The really great gear in the game drops in instances and isn't going to cost you a single gold. This is why there is so much inflation in the game - people who have been 60 forever and have nothing better to do than dump gold on alternate characters, making low level, decent gear skyrocket in price.
As a bit of addendum, I feel like pointing out that Blizzard's game design basically encourages farming. The way things have been moving lately is more and more towards "reputation" based rewards. Meaning, basically, that you kill the same enemies over and over again to eventually (many thousands of kills later) get something cool. It seems pretty stupid to ban some people for farming when that's basically what Blizzard is designing the game to be.
From that blog:
[GM]Dave>> Pulling!!! ----> Shirt!
[GM]Dave>> Heading back to camp.
Susan>> Ready here.
Susan>> (( Ready to Start Skillchain! ))
Susan>> (( Can I have it? ))
[GM]Dave>> Oh, yeah, baby.
[GM]Dave>> (( Turn your party flag on. ))
This GM already seems better than Blizzard.
Where did you get the volume information from? Yahoo reports the average volume at 87,580,600 http://finance.yahoo.com/q?d=t&s=MSFT
Oh, I forgot - having/exploiting a monopoly is a mortal sin that no amount of penance could ever attone for. Heck, he's given away 1/3 of his fortune (see other posts) to charity, but that means nothing since he used his OS monopoly to sell other products and because we all know that _software_ is the ultimate measure of good or evil.
Too bad their is no moderation for +1 Self-righteous prick - I think that would be more appropriate.
I'm not sure what your usage has to do with his experience....I personally find (in absolute numbers) that Firefox crashes more often than IE. But I, like you, tend to use Firefox far more often. That may change when IE 7 is released - I'm starting to like the beta more than Firefox - but there are a few little touches that have prevented me from switching yet.
You can come close to doing 20 things a second?
From the review: "Buttons - 3 physical buttons optimized for gaming response and independently programmable"