Ok, I worked on a project a few years back to visualize how phone calls were billed and the taxes applied, etc. This was no easy task. In fact, the project was abandoned at the time because it was just too darn hard! Too many variables and conditions where records could be lost [gasp!] were the main cause of the abandonment. Of course, the research I was doing was on landline calling. I can only imagine that the situation is very similar for cell calling. It's literally amazing that any of the calls we make actually make it to a bill at all!
Having said that, I can see why they are told to not quote exact costs when those costs are based on things that might not happen due to how calls are billed, etc. Pile on top of that the fact that carriers are charged usage fees by the government that are then spread out over all customers. Then there's the fee changes that happen yearly, taxes varying from locality to locality depending on where the tower is you're talking on, etc., etc.
It's a big mess. They are afraid (legally) to quote an exact number for the cost. They could be sued for misquoting. In this utterly stupid, litigious society we live in they are erring on the side of caution, as their lawyers have informed them. I agree that it's a ridiculous and annoying practice, but knowing the background I do understand their position.
It's one of those not-so-well-thought-out ideas that looks great on paper, but is incredibly impractical to implement. I read some of the earlier posts, and frankly, there's no economical way for this scheme to work until we've established space-based commerce. It's going to be a while before that happens. Possibly another 40 years of trying before we get a viable market in something produced in space. The costs for sending the ISS to the moon and keeping it maintained would be more than the Earth's current budget for all space missions across all nations. Let's not forget that the ISS would probably not survive such a mission as it was designed for Earth orbit and has had numerous problems keeping operational (and intact) in Earth orbit as it is.
Nice dream, but reality bites this one. Maybe another station in another 20 years (or so).
...nice to see the religious wars between Chevy and BMW continue. Yes, I know those are cars. Same stupid premise at work in these arguments. A computer is a computer, is a COMPUTER. They were designed and built to do one thing...MATH. Now, there are some really cool applications of mathematics that allow for other utility; a veritable myriad of utility, actually.
BUT! the bottom line is the fervent arguments over what platform is "better" than the other are utterly ridiculous. Sure, there was a time when I was very much against the Windows platform. To a large extent I still am, but right tool, right job. If you have general computing tasks to do, like most consumers do, they can choose any platform to do that. It really doesn't matter one gnat turd what they buy!
Geeks, nerds, IT personnel, whatever label you want to put on technology professionals (and hobbyists), I have observed that, they commonly have a skewed perspective as a majority. They immediately jump to the conclusion that what works for them works for everyone, whether they are a Linux, Windows or Mac "fanboy". That's utterly ridiculous. If you're going to be a heavy gamer, then a Windows platform is "better" (relatively). If you're going to do graphic design, digital video, or other media development, then there are some that argue that the Mac platform is "better". There's nothing stopping one platform or another from overtaking the other in any of these areas. The real difference is where the applications are for what you want to do at the time you want to do them. If you don't recognize that these things shift, then you are a poor IT professional.
Now, I'm done ranting on that and want to get back to the topic of the post! Apple probably waited to sue because they needed to get evidence of wrong doing and build a case. They had to get their hands on one of the Psystar machines and then analyze what they did to hack around the OS restrictions and see if they violated copyright, or anything else for that matter. That takes time. Psystar didn't start shipping machines until recently. I'm sure someone has the exact date, but then it took time for Apple to build their case. I seriously doubt this was some divisive maneuver. It is simply a case of legal due diligence in building their case against the infringement of intellectual property.
Geesh! Everyone thinks there's a conspiracy behind things they don't understand. [shakes head]
Now I did this as a youngster in the Santa Clara County school system in San Jose, CA. I was in the gifted and talented program there and one of the things that me and my fellow over achievers did was tutor the under achievers. Why? Well, we learned how hard it is to teach others, but we also learned the material better as we were immersed in its teaching and the under achievers actually caught up faster. Also, made some additional friends along the way that helped us not get beat up so much on the playground! I continued the practice well into high school even though it wasn't sanctioned or supported by the Prince William County school system in Manassas, VA (where I completed grades 6 - 12). It does work quite well, and can even get you girls! Ahhhh, high school.:-)
Who said anything about the "nerd/geek vote" other than you? You certainly seem to have a dim and narrow view of democracy. I have friends and politicos that aren't geeks and hitting the streets with facts is a lot easier to do than you realize, especially for a nerd/geek with a blog. Have you not been paying attention to politics in the U.S. over the last several years? Political blogs have a lot of power, but that's just one (new) rung in the system. I know how to start a campaign against a congressman, senator, PRESIDENT, don't you worry.
This seems more than a little disingenuous of Microsoft considering they wanted to do the same thing with Yahoo! against Google. I would hope that even a junior politician in Washington would see the truth of it. If not, they better be aware that they may be voted out of office should they side with MS on this issue.
You can't have "no cooling whatsoever"; impossible unless you contain the thing in a vacuum and suspend it magically so it's not touching any other surface. Thermodynamics 101 people!
What's the ambient temp in the room? If it's not at an office/home standard 68 - 72 F then you're cheating
The case is off!!! Please! You're cheating
All that aside I still have to yawn because telco equipment already does this stuff in environments that would have melted that rinky-dink piece of crap within hours of switching it on. What exactly are they trying to prove? Oh, and what a prize. A rinky-dink piece of crap. No thanks, I'll buy a Mac mini.
External hard drive (or RAID depending on size of data) encrypted (hardware or software) FedEx'd or couriered to the offsite location with the encryption key sent separately via a different carrier or mechanism. I use this scheme with my consulting clients and everyone is happy.
It's high latency, but it's great bandwidth and security.
I'm sure someone must have said this already, but if you are that worried about keyloggers and such on public terminals, DON'T USE THEM!
I'd strongly recommend that you buy a laptop to take with you on vacation so you can check email, etc. from the road. If you're that paranoid about it then the simplest solution is to not use public terminals at all for tasks that require you to enter private data and make the investment in a cheap laptop.
What is the actual percentage of the market for laptops who are developers? The summary almost makes it sound like it's the entire user base and that manufacturers are ignoring a huge and important market segment.
Ok, I was scrolling through the comments trying to find one that said this to make sure I wasn't going to dupe. The number is comparatively small when judged against the larger overall market for laptops. The whole issue seems like flamebait and trolling to me.
I will say this. I wish the industry would make font sizes actually standardized across any size display device. That's something that has ALWAYS bothered me, especially across OSs. Ten point type should be ten point type no matter how many dots per inch are needed to properly represent it on the display device! That, I think, is the real issue more than widescreen v. 4:3.
I really don't get the issues with widescreen that are brought up throughout this thread. It's the same number of vertical dots whether widescreen resolution (1920x1200, for instance) or 4:3 (1600x1200, for instance). I don't get how you would have to "scroll more" on a widescreen display. WTF?!?! Somebody is going to have to explain that one to me very slowly.
Readability and eyestrain are always at odds with each other. For readability purposes you want very high contrast between your foreground (text) and background colors. Obviously, white-on-black or black-on-white are the best choices for readability. The problem is over long periods of time high contrast viewing creates eye strain. This is why legal pads are yellow, for instance. The slightly lower contrast between a yellow background and a dark foreground reduces, but does not eliminate eye strain. The problem recurs at the other end of the spectrum if you have too low a contrast between your foreground and background. Your eyes strain to read the text and it makes things harder to read, period.
As far as colors go, the bottom line depends on the individual. We all see things a little differently, literally! Our visual acuity and duration to eye strain are metrics that do not necessarily apply to everyone and you really have to experiment to find out what contrast level works best for you.
The font issue is a little more defined. Proportional serif fonts (Times, Garamond, etc.) are good for print applications and are the most commonly used in printed publications. Proportional sans-serif fonts (Verdana, Arial, etc.) are best read on computer screens because of the dithering that often occurs to serif fonts. They are also easier to read on computer screens because the characters are more easily recognizable in the simpler, sans-serif form.
That's about all I can share on the subject. There are some well established guidelines, but because every human being is a little different there aren't any real hard and fast rules.
I'm sorry, but I'm with the "no way this counts" camp. Theories have to be tested in the physical world to be proved. Theoretical physics included folks. That's why we have supercolliders and Z-machines, duh! Numerical analysis can help predict physical behavior but it is not law until it is proved in the real world. Sorry guys.
I've been a Tufte fan for almost 20 years. I was introduced to his work, The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, while an Architecture student and multimedia developer in the early 1990s. This man is to graphic design what Newton was to gravity. He really defined the rules and explained why and how they are applied, technically. His statement, "Thus the iPhone got it mostly right," is him basically saying, "It's great, but I would have done some things a little differently." From a man that knows what he knows, that's the highest praise any contemporary could ever hope to get! I don't mean that sarcastically, either. I'd be ecstatic if he said anything like that about my work. Of course, I'd think it was a prank, but I don't think I'm that good anyway.
I was about to comment on how they used a rather wimpy (to today's standards) 14th Century crossbow. Of course, in the Ukraine that may be all they have. I think a modern Commando 2 similar to the one I used as a youngster would probably penetrate that thing. We used to shoot bolts through hefty Northern Virginia phone books. The whole bolt wouldn't go through, but the head would usually get all the way through. Sounds like a Mythbusters project.
Ok, I remember being in college when this guy was in his late twenties, maybe early thirties. This was in the early to mid 1990s. Duke's gotta be pushing Stallone age in video game years! He'll be doing first person shooter from a walker for crying out loud. Didn't he die and get resurrected since then, too? Sheesh!
Ummm...I'm gonna have to agree with you there and say that this is not only troll bait, but is something that will *NEVER* happen. Ever. Really, really, never. Even with Apple's deep pockets, there is no interest at all inside Apple to buy Adobe. Why? Because there's no valid business reason to do so.
If Adobe was doing a piss poor job of bringing products and features to the Mac platform, AND if Adobe was floundering as a company, then, and only then, maybe, on a Tuesday soon after Hell froze over, Apple might think about buying Adobe. Really, really.
Don't know what crack the OP and article writer were smoking, but you need to cut back or try another brand.
I second that as the article linking to the closing of the OS X source is more than a little dated. Apple reopened the source shortly after WWDC in August of 2006. They stated at WWDC that they closed the source temporarily to allow for the API development to "catch up". The source has been open ever since and Apple has no plans to *ever* permanently close the source on OS X. This is pure FUD and troll bait!
less than 2% of UK-based firms have already upgraded all their desktops to Windows Vista. Just shy of 5% said that they have begun a Windows Vista desktop upgrade program. 6.5% said they will upgrade in the next 6 months; 12.6% in the next 12 months; 13% in the next 18 months; and 18% in the next two years. That means that within two years from now, only 56% of survey respondents say they will have upgraded their firm's desktops to Windows Vista.
Ummmm,no, that means 18% will have upgraded to Windows Vista within 24 months. That's what the data said, and you don't add percentages together when they are all coming out of the same pool. If 18% are upgrading in the next 24 months, then that's how many are upgrading. Micro$oft would love it if 56% were upgrading, but they're not!
So, to review for the slower folks in the audience: 2% of 100% have upgraded, 6.5% of 100% will upgrade in 6 months, 12.6% of 100% in 12 months, 13% of 100% in 18 months, and a GRAND TOTAL of 18% of 100% will have upgraded in 24 months. If that's not correct then someone is misrepresenting their data!
This is a clear case of where the folks with knowledge of Unix and its history proved that journalists with no technical background shouldn't be writing for a technical publication or audience. There are *tons* of highly knowledgeable people in the IT industry that would love a chance to write, but who do the pubs get to do this? People with little to no background in computing. How are they supposed to know what they're talking about?!?! Please.
Ok folks, we've seen this time and time again throughout history. Someone finds a cool plant that does something wonderful and then mass plants it outside its native habitat and it starts growing wild and taking over native plant stocks. Can you say kudzu!?!?!? I hope someone stops and thinks about this before they take a knee jerk reaction and start commercializing this stuff and we end up with a greater natural disaster than just polluting our environment. This plant sounds very hearty and seems to offer some interesting possibilities, but let's not go off half cocked at every possibility for replacing fossil fuels!
The quote in the lead-in seems to be a bit of flame bait to me. How do you answer the questions asked with other platforms where the answer means something to business and not the hobbyist? Obviously, it's a complex answer and there are different answers depending upon how and where you are using the platform and whether or not it's critical to business practices. I'll read the article, but on the surface it seems that the reviewer may have taken more of a home user/hobbyist point-of-view for the review and that would be nice to know in the lead in. Again, I will state my stance for the record, right tool, right job. Being an IT manager I already have answers for the questions, but I'm curious to see what folks say in this thread.
Digital Rights Management, Digital Consumer Enablement, Content Protection, Content Encryption, whatever you want to call it the purpose is still the same: to restrict what an end user can do with said content. This guy should get smacked for trying to spin this! A synonym by any other name... I wonder if he has some special versions of the word pander to go along with DRM.
Slashdot Mirror
That almost made spit fly out my nose! Good 1! P.S. Yeah, wtf with the dinky text area!!!
Ok, I worked on a project a few years back to visualize how phone calls were billed and the taxes applied, etc. This was no easy task. In fact, the project was abandoned at the time because it was just too darn hard! Too many variables and conditions where records could be lost [gasp!] were the main cause of the abandonment. Of course, the research I was doing was on landline calling. I can only imagine that the situation is very similar for cell calling. It's literally amazing that any of the calls we make actually make it to a bill at all!
Having said that, I can see why they are told to not quote exact costs when those costs are based on things that might not happen due to how calls are billed, etc. Pile on top of that the fact that carriers are charged usage fees by the government that are then spread out over all customers. Then there's the fee changes that happen yearly, taxes varying from locality to locality depending on where the tower is you're talking on, etc., etc.
It's a big mess. They are afraid (legally) to quote an exact number for the cost. They could be sued for misquoting. In this utterly stupid, litigious society we live in they are erring on the side of caution, as their lawyers have informed them. I agree that it's a ridiculous and annoying practice, but knowing the background I do understand their position.
It's one of those not-so-well-thought-out ideas that looks great on paper, but is incredibly impractical to implement. I read some of the earlier posts, and frankly, there's no economical way for this scheme to work until we've established space-based commerce. It's going to be a while before that happens. Possibly another 40 years of trying before we get a viable market in something produced in space. The costs for sending the ISS to the moon and keeping it maintained would be more than the Earth's current budget for all space missions across all nations. Let's not forget that the ISS would probably not survive such a mission as it was designed for Earth orbit and has had numerous problems keeping operational (and intact) in Earth orbit as it is.
Nice dream, but reality bites this one. Maybe another station in another 20 years (or so).
...nice to see the religious wars between Chevy and BMW continue. Yes, I know those are cars. Same stupid premise at work in these arguments. A computer is a computer, is a COMPUTER. They were designed and built to do one thing...MATH. Now, there are some really cool applications of mathematics that allow for other utility; a veritable myriad of utility, actually.
BUT! the bottom line is the fervent arguments over what platform is "better" than the other are utterly ridiculous. Sure, there was a time when I was very much against the Windows platform. To a large extent I still am, but right tool, right job. If you have general computing tasks to do, like most consumers do, they can choose any platform to do that. It really doesn't matter one gnat turd what they buy!
Geeks, nerds, IT personnel, whatever label you want to put on technology professionals (and hobbyists), I have observed that, they commonly have a skewed perspective as a majority. They immediately jump to the conclusion that what works for them works for everyone, whether they are a Linux, Windows or Mac "fanboy". That's utterly ridiculous. If you're going to be a heavy gamer, then a Windows platform is "better" (relatively). If you're going to do graphic design, digital video, or other media development, then there are some that argue that the Mac platform is "better". There's nothing stopping one platform or another from overtaking the other in any of these areas. The real difference is where the applications are for what you want to do at the time you want to do them. If you don't recognize that these things shift, then you are a poor IT professional.
Now, I'm done ranting on that and want to get back to the topic of the post! Apple probably waited to sue because they needed to get evidence of wrong doing and build a case. They had to get their hands on one of the Psystar machines and then analyze what they did to hack around the OS restrictions and see if they violated copyright, or anything else for that matter. That takes time. Psystar didn't start shipping machines until recently. I'm sure someone has the exact date, but then it took time for Apple to build their case. I seriously doubt this was some divisive maneuver. It is simply a case of legal due diligence in building their case against the infringement of intellectual property.
Geesh! Everyone thinks there's a conspiracy behind things they don't understand. [shakes head]
Now I did this as a youngster in the Santa Clara County school system in San Jose, CA. I was in the gifted and talented program there and one of the things that me and my fellow over achievers did was tutor the under achievers. Why? Well, we learned how hard it is to teach others, but we also learned the material better as we were immersed in its teaching and the under achievers actually caught up faster. Also, made some additional friends along the way that helped us not get beat up so much on the playground! I continued the practice well into high school even though it wasn't sanctioned or supported by the Prince William County school system in Manassas, VA (where I completed grades 6 - 12). It does work quite well, and can even get you girls! Ahhhh, high school. :-)
Who said anything about the "nerd/geek vote" other than you? You certainly seem to have a dim and narrow view of democracy. I have friends and politicos that aren't geeks and hitting the streets with facts is a lot easier to do than you realize, especially for a nerd/geek with a blog. Have you not been paying attention to politics in the U.S. over the last several years? Political blogs have a lot of power, but that's just one (new) rung in the system. I know how to start a campaign against a congressman, senator, PRESIDENT, don't you worry.
How is that *not* extortion? Someone? Anyone? This is ridiculous. These boys have to go down!
This seems more than a little disingenuous of Microsoft considering they wanted to do the same thing with Yahoo! against Google. I would hope that even a junior politician in Washington would see the truth of it. If not, they better be aware that they may be voted out of office should they side with MS on this issue.
All that aside I still have to yawn because telco equipment already does this stuff in environments that would have melted that rinky-dink piece of crap within hours of switching it on. What exactly are they trying to prove? Oh, and what a prize. A rinky-dink piece of crap. No thanks, I'll buy a Mac mini.
External hard drive (or RAID depending on size of data) encrypted (hardware or software) FedEx'd or couriered to the offsite location with the encryption key sent separately via a different carrier or mechanism. I use this scheme with my consulting clients and everyone is happy.
It's high latency, but it's great bandwidth and security.
I'm sure someone must have said this already, but if you are that worried about keyloggers and such on public terminals, DON'T USE THEM!
I'd strongly recommend that you buy a laptop to take with you on vacation so you can check email, etc. from the road. If you're that paranoid about it then the simplest solution is to not use public terminals at all for tasks that require you to enter private data and make the investment in a cheap laptop.
What is the actual percentage of the market for laptops who are developers? The summary almost makes it sound like it's the entire user base and that manufacturers are ignoring a huge and important market segment.
Ok, I was scrolling through the comments trying to find one that said this to make sure I wasn't going to dupe. The number is comparatively small when judged against the larger overall market for laptops. The whole issue seems like flamebait and trolling to me.
I will say this. I wish the industry would make font sizes actually standardized across any size display device. That's something that has ALWAYS bothered me, especially across OSs. Ten point type should be ten point type no matter how many dots per inch are needed to properly represent it on the display device! That, I think, is the real issue more than widescreen v. 4:3.
I really don't get the issues with widescreen that are brought up throughout this thread. It's the same number of vertical dots whether widescreen resolution (1920x1200, for instance) or 4:3 (1600x1200, for instance). I don't get how you would have to "scroll more" on a widescreen display. WTF?!?! Somebody is going to have to explain that one to me very slowly.
Readability and eyestrain are always at odds with each other. For readability purposes you want very high contrast between your foreground (text) and background colors. Obviously, white-on-black or black-on-white are the best choices for readability. The problem is over long periods of time high contrast viewing creates eye strain. This is why legal pads are yellow, for instance. The slightly lower contrast between a yellow background and a dark foreground reduces, but does not eliminate eye strain. The problem recurs at the other end of the spectrum if you have too low a contrast between your foreground and background. Your eyes strain to read the text and it makes things harder to read, period.
As far as colors go, the bottom line depends on the individual. We all see things a little differently, literally! Our visual acuity and duration to eye strain are metrics that do not necessarily apply to everyone and you really have to experiment to find out what contrast level works best for you.
The font issue is a little more defined. Proportional serif fonts (Times, Garamond, etc.) are good for print applications and are the most commonly used in printed publications. Proportional sans-serif fonts (Verdana, Arial, etc.) are best read on computer screens because of the dithering that often occurs to serif fonts. They are also easier to read on computer screens because the characters are more easily recognizable in the simpler, sans-serif form.
That's about all I can share on the subject. There are some well established guidelines, but because every human being is a little different there aren't any real hard and fast rules.
Sequoia seems to be claiming that no one can make a "report" regarding their "software" without their permission.
Ha! Chya right! As if!
I'm sorry, but I'm with the "no way this counts" camp. Theories have to be tested in the physical world to be proved. Theoretical physics included folks. That's why we have supercolliders and Z-machines, duh! Numerical analysis can help predict physical behavior but it is not law until it is proved in the real world. Sorry guys.
I've been a Tufte fan for almost 20 years. I was introduced to his work, The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, while an Architecture student and multimedia developer in the early 1990s. This man is to graphic design what Newton was to gravity. He really defined the rules and explained why and how they are applied, technically. His statement, "Thus the iPhone got it mostly right," is him basically saying, "It's great, but I would have done some things a little differently." From a man that knows what he knows, that's the highest praise any contemporary could ever hope to get! I don't mean that sarcastically, either. I'd be ecstatic if he said anything like that about my work. Of course, I'd think it was a prank, but I don't think I'm that good anyway.
I was about to comment on how they used a rather wimpy (to today's standards) 14th Century crossbow. Of course, in the Ukraine that may be all they have. I think a modern Commando 2 similar to the one I used as a youngster would probably penetrate that thing. We used to shoot bolts through hefty Northern Virginia phone books. The whole bolt wouldn't go through, but the head would usually get all the way through. Sounds like a Mythbusters project.
Ok, I remember being in college when this guy was in his late twenties, maybe early thirties. This was in the early to mid 1990s. Duke's gotta be pushing Stallone age in video game years! He'll be doing first person shooter from a walker for crying out loud. Didn't he die and get resurrected since then, too? Sheesh!
I really fail to see why this is interesting.
Ummm...I'm gonna have to agree with you there and say that this is not only troll bait, but is something that will *NEVER* happen. Ever. Really, really, never. Even with Apple's deep pockets, there is no interest at all inside Apple to buy Adobe. Why? Because there's no valid business reason to do so.
If Adobe was doing a piss poor job of bringing products and features to the Mac platform, AND if Adobe was floundering as a company, then, and only then, maybe, on a Tuesday soon after Hell froze over, Apple might think about buying Adobe. Really, really.
Don't know what crack the OP and article writer were smoking, but you need to cut back or try another brand.
I second that as the article linking to the closing of the OS X source is more than a little dated. Apple reopened the source shortly after WWDC in August of 2006. They stated at WWDC that they closed the source temporarily to allow for the API development to "catch up". The source has been open ever since and Apple has no plans to *ever* permanently close the source on OS X. This is pure FUD and troll bait!
less than 2% of UK-based firms have already upgraded all their desktops to Windows Vista. Just shy of 5% said that they have begun a Windows Vista desktop upgrade program. 6.5% said they will upgrade in the next 6 months; 12.6% in the next 12 months; 13% in the next 18 months; and 18% in the next two years. That means that within two years from now, only 56% of survey respondents say they will have upgraded their firm's desktops to Windows Vista.
Ummmm,no, that means 18% will have upgraded to Windows Vista within 24 months. That's what the data said, and you don't add percentages together when they are all coming out of the same pool. If 18% are upgrading in the next 24 months, then that's how many are upgrading. Micro$oft would love it if 56% were upgrading, but they're not!
So, to review for the slower folks in the audience: 2% of 100% have upgraded, 6.5% of 100% will upgrade in 6 months, 12.6% of 100% in 12 months, 13% of 100% in 18 months, and a GRAND TOTAL of 18% of 100% will have upgraded in 24 months. If that's not correct then someone is misrepresenting their data!
This is a clear case of where the folks with knowledge of Unix and its history proved that journalists with no technical background shouldn't be writing for a technical publication or audience. There are *tons* of highly knowledgeable people in the IT industry that would love a chance to write, but who do the pubs get to do this? People with little to no background in computing. How are they supposed to know what they're talking about?!?! Please.
Ok folks, we've seen this time and time again throughout history. Someone finds a cool plant that does something wonderful and then mass plants it outside its native habitat and it starts growing wild and taking over native plant stocks. Can you say kudzu!?!?!? I hope someone stops and thinks about this before they take a knee jerk reaction and start commercializing this stuff and we end up with a greater natural disaster than just polluting our environment. This plant sounds very hearty and seems to offer some interesting possibilities, but let's not go off half cocked at every possibility for replacing fossil fuels!
The quote in the lead-in seems to be a bit of flame bait to me. How do you answer the questions asked with other platforms where the answer means something to business and not the hobbyist? Obviously, it's a complex answer and there are different answers depending upon how and where you are using the platform and whether or not it's critical to business practices. I'll read the article, but on the surface it seems that the reviewer may have taken more of a home user/hobbyist point-of-view for the review and that would be nice to know in the lead in. Again, I will state my stance for the record, right tool, right job. Being an IT manager I already have answers for the questions, but I'm curious to see what folks say in this thread.
Digital Rights Management, Digital Consumer Enablement, Content Protection, Content Encryption, whatever you want to call it the purpose is still the same: to restrict what an end user can do with said content. This guy should get smacked for trying to spin this! A synonym by any other name... I wonder if he has some special versions of the word pander to go along with DRM.