I'm not forgetting the proprietary devices. They weren't a factor in my original post though. If you're getting a Dell, you're getting the 3 year warranty anyway. You call them, they ship out a new part. When you're servicing hundreds of systems between companies you don't want to deal with screws and cases and specs and whatnot.
When one of the Optis has a bad anything, the LAST thing I want to deal with is case problems. I want to get that user up and running so they're working again. Let Dell deal with what's compatible and what isn't. I've got enough crap to worry about with people breaking everything else. You get the part, power the case down, it's back up in two or three minutes.
Again, the above points are simply stating that Dell cases are stupid easy to *service.*
On a personal note, I love my beige box with its optical and magnetic drives securely screwed into the bays with two on each side. Sure, it takes ten minutes to pull something out, but damnit, it's a labour of love there.
Dells, on the other hand, are appliances. People keep them the way they are til they die, then get a new one. If you're getting a Dell, chances are all that *would* get upgraded is the RAM or the HD. Pick the right tool for the right job: Nina in corporate accounts payable doesn't need an AMD FX with Crossfire, and you don't play CS:S on an Optiplex small form factor.
So it's apparently a flavor of JET...but different.
I could "see" them opening JET Red (Access) in about 10 years, because there are no plans to make it 64 bit, but not JET Blue (ESE/Exchange). That'd open up Exchange and MS wouldn't want to do that.
I know Access uses JET, but I haven't run across anything saying Exchange uses it... If they did, I could use eseutil to fix this stupid broken Access mdb I was just told about today instead of the not-working jetcomp.exe tool.
Apparently ESE stands for Extensible Storage Engine as well...so I'm gonna have to say Exchange doesn't use JET.
Hard drives and backup tapes are both magnetic, and they technically did keep a backup on a format that wasn't magnetic: the original hard copies.
Note from the article (and the summary) the IT guy formatted both the original and the backup hard drives. Then there was the bad tape. So that's 2 sources. What surprises me is it wasn't on another tape somewhere.
we have this strange spectrum between this sort of innovation and physical innovation. When you look at physical products as simply results of the physical space we are working in, we can equally say that a Theorem is a result of the space of mathematics, and an algorithm (or game/app for that matter) is a result of the software space.
Well, one plus with a Theorem is that it has a rigidly defined set of conditions and is important only in its parameters. No point in digging out the Pythagorean theorum if you're dealing with a circle.
Software is rarely as well defined. I wouldn't even consider software, especially games or apps, an algorithm. They're many algorithms working together to aid in completing certain tasks. Each of those algorithms, by themselves, is nothing, but the way they're used together is important; it's akin to how each of the words in this comment is not important, what matters is the order I place them in.
Shouldn't games and apps be unpatentable if algorithms are?
Right. Those (should) fall under 'copyright.'
The problem is the line was blurred the instant software patents were granted. (And then further with patents on business methods and tax strategies.) A patent should always revolve about something tangible (at least, IMO.) Printed material, et. al., has copyright, company names and logos have trademark, but there's nothing that protects physical design other than patent.
In the case of Wiles, well, the man's name is forever attached to it. You think any of those 3,000 patent monkeys at IBM got their name attached to the name of a patent? Not likely. That's what he got for his seven years of work: recognition in math books for decades to come. (And while standards of value may vary, I personally think that's downright kickass.)
And now all I can think of is a call to Dell Automatic Weapons Support...taking 15 minutes to determine the gun's not working because it's out of ammo...
Baloney. Having worked with Dell systems that are up to 5 years old, I have to admit that while the parts themselves are crap, you can field strip a Dell desktop in under a minute. They are VERY modular and have only gotten better in that respect. Desktop models hardly use screws anymore, just tabs and buttons.
Taking a hard drive out of a Dell Inspiron? Two screws under the PCMCIA slot. Four screws to remove the HD from its cover guard. That's it.
Taking a hard drive out of a Sony Vaio?...Let's just say it includes popping off the keyboard and nearly every screw in the thing. And that's for starters...
If there's one thing Dell's done right, it's made cases that are stupid easy to field service. (Obviously for good reason, considering how often they need to be serviced.)
Incidentally, when I got my Dell laptop (...4ish years ago I think) my options on office software were a Corel WordPerfect Suite, MS Works and MS Office variants.
I had to pick one of them, and the free option was Corel.
Having not needed a new laptop since then I haven't bothered to see if they changed that. Although by the sounds of the discussion, appears it might have.
The Morissettian irony of all this is on my drive to work this morning (at 6:40AM) there was an accident that blocked off two lanes of a three-lane street. I don't have a far distance to drive so it's actually unusual to see one on my trips.
Worse, before the change it had just gotten to the point where I didn't need to use my headlights if the sky was clear.
So please stop bitching and moaning about how companies are supposed to make money.
Well, that is the underlying concept behind a company: making money. That's why there's outsourcing and patent fights and the recall equation.
The trick is making money while still respecting its customers.
SCO is trying to make money suing IBM, ignoring their own target market (it is assumed for the purpose of this argument that SCO actually HAS a market). It should be no mystery why they're losing business, and it's not...to everyone outside SCO.
"In Japan and Korea, where there is net neutrality and much greater competition among broadband providers than in the United States, there are also higher broadband speeds," he said."
Call me crazy, but I would think it's the "greater competition among broadband providers" that is spurring the higher broadband speed.
You could replace 'net neutrality' with 'rice paddies' in that quote and it would still be accurate.
If you can buy early and sell a day later, I imagine there'd be a lot of profit to be had.
That involves knowing which stocks are going to be spammed on the next day. Good in theory, but while IANASB (stock broker) I don't think portfolios of penny stocks are very common, so it'd require a lot of guesswork unless you're in the loop
This, of course, goes against much of the suggestions from/. before on this topic, in that the SEC should get involved in this penny stock spam trading and put a halt to it because spam stock could be traced back to whoever makes the biggest deal on it in the end.
Can we make up our minds here? I'm getting confused what I should be a zealot about...
About the only thing I could see that would make this a seller is if it was more indestructable than a Toughbook.
I see lots of comments on how underpowered it is, and how regular laptops have better specs than this for half the price, and high end laptops fly past it. But if it could stop a bullet and get thrashed about in a washing machine, one could see it as a good portable device for demanding territory.
That's where I see this device: a stripped down, but even more resiliant Toughbook.
However, at only 1.5lb, I don't think that's where this is targeted...
$30 bucks is nothing compared to another $120 PS2 when it breaks. My former roommate was always playing PS1 games on his PS2, it was like half and half. I camped out for the Wii basically because I was getting a Gamecube (a $100 piece of hardware) at the same time and currently been playing a lot of GCN games I missed out on because I didn't have one.
Plus without backwards compat, you would need to keep both consoles hooked up or swap cables out. One box is just one set of cables and cuts down on the clutter.
It might not *seem* like a selling factor to analysts, but real people have different ideas.
In Elysium's mind, this sets up a really, really bad precedent:
The precedent has already been set. Microsoft, Sony (and I'm thinking EQ expansions here more than PS3), whoever released NWN2...I'm sure there's more but I don't want to bother google searching for this junk. Only company that bothers to release stuff as best they can is Valve I think.
The whole plan is 'release now, patch later.' Patches are too ingrained in the norm these days. Heck, people practically EXPECT patches. If a company didn't release patches, people would begin to think they're leaving their product unsecure or something. Catch-22. Blame the public for accepting patches.
To your left you see a sharp precipice going nearly straight down. Sticking out of the cliff wall are thorny bushes.
> Look R
To your right you see an overgrown thicket, filled with poison ivy, snakes and thorny bushes. The remains of a trail appear to pass through the thicket.
> Climb boulder
You grab hold of the boulder and attempt to pull yourself up, but lacking a firm grip, you slip and hit the ground with your butt.
In it, the plaintiffs lay out their disagreement with the judge's reasoning while taking time to point out that the fees awarded far exceed any damages they could have recovered should their suit have been successful.
And that's how it should be. Always. If you lose, you pay, with the theory that you'll learn your lesson and not do it again. Conversely, if they win, they get more money. It's a risk they took from the getgo, and have been getting away with it because there have been few real challenges against them.
Now that their business model is starting to show cracks, they now want the risk removed yet keep the reward.
Hopefully the judge would realize that removing paying attorney's fees would give even more insentive to lawsuits since they wouldn't worry about consequences if they lost.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not forgetting the proprietary devices. They weren't a factor in my original post though. If you're getting a Dell, you're getting the 3 year warranty anyway. You call them, they ship out a new part. When you're servicing hundreds of systems between companies you don't want to deal with screws and cases and specs and whatnot.
When one of the Optis has a bad anything, the LAST thing I want to deal with is case problems. I want to get that user up and running so they're working again. Let Dell deal with what's compatible and what isn't. I've got enough crap to worry about with people breaking everything else. You get the part, power the case down, it's back up in two or three minutes.
Again, the above points are simply stating that Dell cases are stupid easy to *service.*
On a personal note, I love my beige box with its optical and magnetic drives securely screwed into the bays with two on each side. Sure, it takes ten minutes to pull something out, but damnit, it's a labour of love there.
Dells, on the other hand, are appliances. People keep them the way they are til they die, then get a new one. If you're getting a Dell, chances are all that *would* get upgraded is the RAM or the HD. Pick the right tool for the right job: Nina in corporate accounts payable doesn't need an AMD FX with Crossfire, and you don't play CS:S on an Optiplex small form factor.
Further comments, apparently ESE was meant to succeed the Access JET, but that didn't happen.
n gine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Storage_E
So it's apparently a flavor of JET...but different.
I could "see" them opening JET Red (Access) in about 10 years, because there are no plans to make it 64 bit, but not JET Blue (ESE/Exchange). That'd open up Exchange and MS wouldn't want to do that.
I know Access uses JET, but I haven't run across anything saying Exchange uses it... If they did, I could use eseutil to fix this stupid broken Access mdb I was just told about today instead of the not-working jetcomp.exe tool.
Apparently ESE stands for Extensible Storage Engine as well...so I'm gonna have to say Exchange doesn't use JET.
Hard drives and backup tapes are both magnetic, and they technically did keep a backup on a format that wasn't magnetic: the original hard copies.
Note from the article (and the summary) the IT guy formatted both the original and the backup hard drives. Then there was the bad tape. So that's 2 sources. What surprises me is it wasn't on another tape somewhere.
we have this strange spectrum between this sort of innovation and physical innovation. When you look at physical products as simply results of the physical space we are working in, we can equally say that a Theorem is a result of the space of mathematics, and an algorithm (or game/app for that matter) is a result of the software space.
Well, one plus with a Theorem is that it has a rigidly defined set of conditions and is important only in its parameters. No point in digging out the Pythagorean theorum if you're dealing with a circle.
Software is rarely as well defined. I wouldn't even consider software, especially games or apps, an algorithm. They're many algorithms working together to aid in completing certain tasks. Each of those algorithms, by themselves, is nothing, but the way they're used together is important; it's akin to how each of the words in this comment is not important, what matters is the order I place them in.
Shouldn't games and apps be unpatentable if algorithms are?
Right. Those (should) fall under 'copyright.'
The problem is the line was blurred the instant software patents were granted. (And then further with patents on business methods and tax strategies.) A patent should always revolve about something tangible (at least, IMO.) Printed material, et. al., has copyright, company names and logos have trademark, but there's nothing that protects physical design other than patent.
In the case of Wiles, well, the man's name is forever attached to it. You think any of those 3,000 patent monkeys at IBM got their name attached to the name of a patent? Not likely. That's what he got for his seven years of work: recognition in math books for decades to come. (And while standards of value may vary, I personally think that's downright kickass.)
Well, all he has to do then is add "on the internet" somewhere. Bam, instant approval.
And four times as processor intensive.
The RIAA's argument that they shouldn't have to pay attorney's fees is based, in part, that the cost of their legal team would have exceeded the amount Foster would have needed to pay them if the RIAA won. ( http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=capi tol_foster_070221MotReconsider , page 4)
The judge is now saying "put up or shut up."
And now all I can think of is a call to Dell Automatic Weapons Support...taking 15 minutes to determine the gun's not working because it's out of ammo...
"Now what's the service tag on your AK-47?"...
They rivet the cases shut on Dells!
...Let's just say it includes popping off the keyboard and nearly every screw in the thing. And that's for starters...
Baloney. Having worked with Dell systems that are up to 5 years old, I have to admit that while the parts themselves are crap, you can field strip a Dell desktop in under a minute. They are VERY modular and have only gotten better in that respect. Desktop models hardly use screws anymore, just tabs and buttons.
Taking a hard drive out of a Dell Inspiron? Two screws under the PCMCIA slot. Four screws to remove the HD from its cover guard. That's it.
Taking a hard drive out of a Sony Vaio?
If there's one thing Dell's done right, it's made cases that are stupid easy to field service. (Obviously for good reason, considering how often they need to be serviced.)
Incidentally, when I got my Dell laptop (...4ish years ago I think) my options on office software were a Corel WordPerfect Suite, MS Works and MS Office variants.
I had to pick one of them, and the free option was Corel.
Having not needed a new laptop since then I haven't bothered to see if they changed that. Although by the sounds of the discussion, appears it might have.
The Morissettian irony of all this is on my drive to work this morning (at 6:40AM) there was an accident that blocked off two lanes of a three-lane street. I don't have a far distance to drive so it's actually unusual to see one on my trips.
Worse, before the change it had just gotten to the point where I didn't need to use my headlights if the sky was clear.
So please stop bitching and moaning about how companies are supposed to make money.
Well, that is the underlying concept behind a company: making money. That's why there's outsourcing and patent fights and the recall equation.
The trick is making money while still respecting its customers.
SCO is trying to make money suing IBM, ignoring their own target market (it is assumed for the purpose of this argument that SCO actually HAS a market). It should be no mystery why they're losing business, and it's not...to everyone outside SCO.
"In Japan and Korea, where there is net neutrality and much greater competition among broadband providers than in the United States, there are also higher broadband speeds," he said."
Call me crazy, but I would think it's the "greater competition among broadband providers" that is spurring the higher broadband speed.
You could replace 'net neutrality' with 'rice paddies' in that quote and it would still be accurate.
If you can buy early and sell a day later, I imagine there'd be a lot of profit to be had.
That involves knowing which stocks are going to be spammed on the next day. Good in theory, but while IANASB (stock broker) I don't think portfolios of penny stocks are very common, so it'd require a lot of guesswork unless you're in the loop
This, of course, goes against much of the suggestions from /. before on this topic, in that the SEC should get involved in this penny stock spam trading and put a halt to it because spam stock could be traced back to whoever makes the biggest deal on it in the end.
Can we make up our minds here? I'm getting confused what I should be a zealot about...
About the only thing I could see that would make this a seller is if it was more indestructable than a Toughbook.
I see lots of comments on how underpowered it is, and how regular laptops have better specs than this for half the price, and high end laptops fly past it. But if it could stop a bullet and get thrashed about in a washing machine, one could see it as a good portable device for demanding territory.
That's where I see this device: a stripped down, but even more resiliant Toughbook.
However, at only 1.5lb, I don't think that's where this is targeted...
It's not from Microsoft; it just happens to run Windows.
Paul Allen hasn't been with MS for decades.
$30 bucks is nothing compared to another $120 PS2 when it breaks. My former roommate was always playing PS1 games on his PS2, it was like half and half. I camped out for the Wii basically because I was getting a Gamecube (a $100 piece of hardware) at the same time and currently been playing a lot of GCN games I missed out on because I didn't have one.
Plus without backwards compat, you would need to keep both consoles hooked up or swap cables out. One box is just one set of cables and cuts down on the clutter.
It might not *seem* like a selling factor to analysts, but real people have different ideas.
I can think of many reasons a scientist could try and sell magazines. Fame and Grants come to mind rather quickly.
And at thirty magazine subscriptions, they get a brand new TI-84!
In Elysium's mind, this sets up a really, really bad precedent:
The precedent has already been set. Microsoft, Sony (and I'm thinking EQ expansions here more than PS3), whoever released NWN2...I'm sure there's more but I don't want to bother google searching for this junk. Only company that bothers to release stuff as best they can is Valve I think.
The whole plan is 'release now, patch later.' Patches are too ingrained in the norm these days. Heck, people practically EXPECT patches. If a company didn't release patches, people would begin to think they're leaving their product unsecure or something. Catch-22. Blame the public for accepting patches.
74% of the people surveyed?
Just a wild guess...
> Look L
To your left you see a sharp precipice going nearly straight down. Sticking out of the cliff wall are thorny bushes.
> Look R
To your right you see an overgrown thicket, filled with poison ivy, snakes and thorny bushes. The remains of a trail appear to pass through the thicket.
> Climb boulder
You grab hold of the boulder and attempt to pull yourself up, but lacking a firm grip, you slip and hit the ground with your butt.
In it, the plaintiffs lay out their disagreement with the judge's reasoning while taking time to point out that the fees awarded far exceed any damages they could have recovered should their suit have been successful.
And that's how it should be. Always. If you lose, you pay, with the theory that you'll learn your lesson and not do it again. Conversely, if they win, they get more money. It's a risk they took from the getgo, and have been getting away with it because there have been few real challenges against them.
Now that their business model is starting to show cracks, they now want the risk removed yet keep the reward.
Hopefully the judge would realize that removing paying attorney's fees would give even more insentive to lawsuits since they wouldn't worry about consequences if they lost.
This is the RIAA pitifully grasping at straws...