[tapping into] "unused computing power and storage space"
is specifically what Kaaza is designed to do.
" they had unwittingly agreed to install software that could help turn their computers into nodes for a peer-to-peer network controlled by another company. "
that's the same as saying someone who installs IIS unwittingly agreed to install software that could publish documents on the internet for everyone to read. Of course most people do install IIS unwittingly, and thanks to the many vulnerabilities, you'll probly be publishing more than you intended to.
That specific part of the Terms that cnet holds up as bad is the *necessary* and desired part of kaaza. Granted, they do some sneaky stuff on the side, but they don't call it a "file sharing" program for no reason.
I can, but the catch is I need a very large order. I was just making a point, but with even a modest order, I'll give you the support for 150/box.
My own business model (just starting) is similar to the VA concept, sell the hardware with Linux installed and tack on the price of windows (and call it support), but maybe a better idea would be installing on existing customer hardware when available, since that is more of the target linux market.
IE 5.5 wasn't around at the same time as Netscape 3.04 Gold, so you're point is ridiculous (and every version of IE, from 2.0 on was *way* more bloated than Netscape. Netscape 4.5 (4.0 with mail, composer and everything) was something like 14 MB. IE 4.0 was 80 megabytes! And I don't think that even included the JVM. It was undisputably a shittier browser. It crashed more than Mozilla M19, had spotty DOM support, tons of "custom" features that have since been dropped, was way away from the standard. You may have been impressed with , but that was just Microsofts answer to . But at the same time they introduced Frontpage 98, so the web became broken unless you used IE4.0. IE 5 got more stable, but it wasn't until 5.5 that *anyone* thought IE was better than Netscape.
Years ago some guy invented fuel injection for automobiles. Texaco bought the patent. For 17 years, no cars had fuel injection.
Not so many years ago Netscape made a web browser which became immensely popular. Then Microsoft bought a competing product and started offering it installed with the OS. In order to use Netscape you had to download what Microsoft considered "a critical part of the operating system" over a 26400 byte dialup connection (if you were lucky. ) In order to try to compete (Netscape, who wasn't getting anything for the browser -- Microsoft made $87 or more on every copy of Internet Explorer sold -- except to a few large OEMs who got it a bit lower.)
Netscape offered to pay the OEMs to include Netscape. Some agreed... that is until microsoft threatened to force them to pay retail-- that's $150 -- for Windows if they included both Windows with internet explorer AND netscape.
I got one of those 1998 K6-II's that works like a charm. Dozens of them actually, but only still use the one. I'm not excited about X86-64 either, and Itanium will never be practical, but I still dream about that Alpha that was stuck doing DNS on NT.
apple does not control the hardware, unless you call controlling hwat shape the case that houses their commodity components will be "controlling the hardware."
Redhat is on top because of a very smart move with IDG, QUE, and other tech book publishers. That's right, "Linux for Dummies" came with Redhat. So everyone's first experience with Linux was Redhat. First to market does mean something.
at a hundred and fifty dollar a computer I'll install linux and all your PCs and provide 3 years of support and upgrades. If you purchase 10 million copies of my office suite (at $250 apiece), I'll give you *any* features you want.
Fining *them* isn't the solution. Say Bill Gates tries to upset the world markets in retaliation for attempting to break up Microsoft. Say he tries to put everyone out of a job who uses non Microsoft products. Say he tries to control the whole of online banking. Say he fails. What's the worst that happens? Microsoft is broken up and he's left with a super mansion, a rolls-royce, and 50 billion worthless stock certificates that he could sell as toilet paper and live comfortably off the proceeds until he dies. Look at Enron. There is no accountability for corporate screw ups, theivery, failure, and lawlessless. At very worst he loses his job, and maybe a little bit of his ego.
You can't punish corporations and expect people to change.
Bill Gates/Microsoft may be a bit of an exception, since he's been tied to it his whole life. And it is, after all, only software. But what about a company that gets caught poisoning the ground water, or beating its workers in Malaysia?
Oligopolies are a part of the American way. Our government believes in a system of checks and balances. If they can't milk the largest company, they can go to the next two largest and still have a majority.
um, he's an corporate executive. It could have been Chrysler or Proctor and Gamble and he'd have the same insight into chips and software. He probably doesn't even use a spreadsheet himself.
While that may be true, Col. Sanders may just like Windows, or Bill Gates personally. A lot of people (especially business types) do admire Microsoft, and I can't think of anything Microsoft has done that hurts AMD directly. Even the oligopoly of OEMs maintained by Microsoft showed they were not 100% Intel after all (even if they all are again.) He is right about Windows servers selling AMD chips where they weren't sold before. That Linux is doing so at the same time doesn't change that. And Linus has probably never invited him to lunch.
I think what AMD did was force Intel to compete. It was 486 clones that forced them to create pentiums, and it was AMD and Cyrix that gave us the pentium 2. Without AMDs aggressive tech push, we might still be slavering over the Celeron 300A
If he'd've said 5 years, then *maybe* he'd have some credibility. I don't believe the court order was ever repealed that forbade Microsoft to bundle Internet Explorer with Windows.
Anyway, sometimes you have to take a step back to move forward. If we went back twenty years to an industry without Microsoft, (and no other technology since then existed), advances would likely come much quicker, and be more scalable. Maybe we'd have had SMP RISC/CISC SCSI computers with secure, robust, free operating systems and a truly useful p2p internet ten years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
[tapping into] "unused computing power and storage space"
is specifically what Kaaza is designed to do.
" they had unwittingly agreed to install software that could help turn their computers into nodes for a peer-to-peer network controlled by another company. "
that's the same as saying someone who installs IIS unwittingly agreed to install software that could publish documents on the internet for everyone to read. Of course most people do install IIS unwittingly, and thanks to the many vulnerabilities, you'll probly be publishing more than you intended to.
That specific part of the Terms that cnet holds up as bad is the *necessary* and desired part of kaaza. Granted, they do some sneaky stuff on the side, but they don't call it a "file sharing" program for no reason.
I can, but the catch is I need a very large order. I was just making a point, but with even a modest order, I'll give you the support for 150/box.
My own business model (just starting) is similar to the VA concept, sell the hardware with Linux installed and tack on the price of windows (and call it support), but maybe a better idea would be installing on existing customer hardware when available, since that is more of the target linux market.
IE 5.5 wasn't around at the same time as Netscape 3.04 Gold, so you're point is ridiculous (and every version of IE, from 2.0 on was *way* more bloated than Netscape. Netscape 4.5 (4.0 with mail, composer and everything) was something like 14 MB. IE 4.0 was 80 megabytes! And I don't think that even included the JVM. It was undisputably a shittier browser. It crashed more than Mozilla M19, had spotty DOM support, tons of "custom" features that have since been dropped, was way away from the standard. You may have been impressed with , but that was just Microsofts answer to . But at the same time they introduced Frontpage 98, so the web became broken unless you used IE4.0. IE 5 got more stable, but it wasn't until 5.5 that *anyone* thought IE was better than Netscape.
Microsoft doesn't give away software they "include" it, and then raise the price of windows.
Years ago some guy invented fuel injection for automobiles. Texaco bought the patent. For 17 years, no cars had fuel injection.
Not so many years ago Netscape made a web browser which became immensely popular. Then Microsoft bought a competing product and started offering it installed with the OS. In order to use Netscape you had to download what Microsoft considered "a critical part of the operating system" over a 26400 byte dialup connection (if you were lucky. ) In order to try to compete (Netscape, who wasn't getting anything for the browser -- Microsoft made $87 or more on every copy of Internet Explorer sold -- except to a few large OEMs who got it a bit lower.)
Netscape offered to pay the OEMs to include Netscape. Some agreed... that is until microsoft threatened to force them to pay retail-- that's $150 -- for Windows if they included both Windows with internet explorer AND netscape.
I got one of those 1998 K6-II's that works like a charm. Dozens of them actually, but only still use the one. I'm not excited about X86-64 either, and Itanium will never be practical, but I still dream about that Alpha that was stuck doing DNS on NT.
He probably says so because he was specifically coached to say so by Bill Gates personally. Haven't you seen the recent news?
apple does not control the hardware, unless you call controlling hwat shape the case that houses their commodity components will be "controlling the hardware."
no, compaq broke the PC monopoly in 1984. And IBM let it go, with a little persuasion from Mr. Reagan.
VA died from very poor management, and phenominal waste of resources. They made enough money on IPO day to keep them running for a decade.
Redhat is on top because of a very smart move with IDG, QUE, and other tech book publishers. That's right, "Linux for Dummies" came with Redhat. So everyone's first experience with Linux was Redhat. First to market does mean something.
and what is the most useful file format? So useful compilers are built on the assumption of it? That's right, UNICODE!
Less than 30% of people buy servers.
Sorry dude, as much as we can look back at Netscape and say it sucks now, in 1998 it was far and away the best there was.
Let me know when it reaches 1.0
At least Mozilla exists
at a hundred and fifty dollar a computer I'll install linux and all your PCs and provide 3 years of support and upgrades. If you purchase 10 million copies of my office suite (at $250 apiece), I'll give you *any* features you want.
Um... those are results of the reunification of AT&T.
The RBOCs were granted local monopolies and then destoyed the CLECs by buying congress and outlawing competition.
There are 3 1/2 baby bells now. And QWEST is allied to Microsoft.
Fining *them* isn't the solution. Say Bill Gates tries to upset the world markets in retaliation for attempting to break up Microsoft. Say he tries to put everyone out of a job who uses non Microsoft products. Say he tries to control the whole of online banking. Say he fails. What's the worst that happens? Microsoft is broken up and he's left with a super mansion, a rolls-royce, and 50 billion worthless stock certificates that he could sell as toilet paper and live comfortably off the proceeds until he dies. Look at Enron. There is no accountability for corporate screw ups, theivery, failure, and lawlessless. At very worst he loses his job, and maybe a little bit of his ego.
You can't punish corporations and expect people to change.
Bill Gates/Microsoft may be a bit of an exception, since he's been tied to it his whole life. And it is, after all, only software. But what about a company that gets caught poisoning the ground water, or beating its workers in Malaysia?
Oligopolies are a part of the American way. Our government believes in a system of checks and balances. If they can't milk the largest company, they can go to the next two largest and still have a majority.
+1, Insightful
um, he's an corporate executive. It could have been Chrysler or Proctor and Gamble and he'd have the same insight into chips and software. He probably doesn't even use a spreadsheet himself.
While that may be true, Col. Sanders may just like Windows, or Bill Gates personally. A lot of people (especially business types) do admire Microsoft, and I can't think of anything Microsoft has done that hurts AMD directly. Even the oligopoly of OEMs maintained by Microsoft showed they were not 100% Intel after all (even if they all are again.) He is right about Windows servers selling AMD chips where they weren't sold before. That Linux is doing so at the same time doesn't change that. And Linus has probably never invited him to lunch.
I think what AMD did was force Intel to compete. It was 486 clones that forced them to create pentiums, and it was AMD and Cyrix that gave us the pentium 2. Without AMDs aggressive tech push, we might still be slavering over the Celeron 300A
Of course it does. Especially while AMD was leading the bogomips race. The more bloated applications are, the faster the CPU you'll need.
If he'd've said 5 years, then *maybe* he'd have some credibility. I don't believe the court order was ever repealed that forbade Microsoft to bundle Internet Explorer with Windows.
Anyway, sometimes you have to take a step back to move forward. If we went back twenty years to an industry without Microsoft, (and no other technology since then existed), advances would likely come much quicker, and be more scalable. Maybe we'd have had SMP RISC/CISC SCSI computers with secure, robust, free operating systems and a truly useful p2p internet ten years ago.