MS's real problem isn't the DOJ or JudgeJackson(JJ), but windows itself. Windows increasingly is turning out to be a malignant cancer infecting MS's image and long term income potential. MS would have jumped on the Linux bandwagon eons ago if it weren't for windows... What are the options? 1)'fix' the problem; 2)kill/paralyze it; 3)cut it away. 2) is excluded for obvious reasons; 1) is economically and technically unviable, so only 3) is left: cut it away... but how? 3a) Spin it off into a daughter company (vertical split)? And have the parent start working on Linux applications? How do you explain that to your shareholders(doh)? to your market? What would be the effects on the parent company? Could have worked (but would have been unnecessary and suspicious) before Linux (really) entered the arena, but isn't a viable option any longer. 3b) 'Split it off'? (Horizontal split, Microsoft doesn't own stock of the new company) = the unthinkable, unless... Unless someone else does it FOR YOU. (After a 'brave' fight, of course...) Someone like JJ 'n' da DOJ, for instance. So Ballmer shouts:'Do NOT... S P L I T U S U P !'...rite... Of course MS will have to appeal/settle, so JJ comes up with a cool appendix: the IE corporation(???); to be appealed/settled away... And so MS gets its 2-way split into the Windows Corporation (WC, Flemish abbrev. for toilet) and Microsoft'sNotWindows Corporation (MSNWC). WC obviously develops and markets (and whatevers) the windows OS, while MSNWC focuses on all the other ex-MS products. Although some initial cooperation might occur, MSNWC quickly goes on to develop Linux (and *BSD,...?) versions of MS office, IE, games, etc. and even creates their own Microsoft'sNotWindowsLinux (what's in a name), effectively 'forcing' WC to open up the secret api's, to develop versions of windows for other platforms, or even go open source in a desperate attempt to stay ahead of the competition. Needless to say, windows will no longer be a threat to the long-term survival of the new MS, MSNWC. MSNWC (...to be continued) (Wonder if MSNWC's gonna be barred from OS development...)
MS's real problem isn't the DOJ or JudgeJackson(JJ), but windows itself. Windows increasingly is turning out to be a malignant cancer infecting MS's image and long term income potential. For instance, I'm convinced MS would have jumped on the Linux bandwagon eons ago if it weren't for windows... What are the options for treatment? 1)'fix' the problem; 2)kill/paralyze it; 3)cut it away. 2) is excluded for obvious reasons; 1) is economically and technically unviable, so only 3) is left: cut it away... but how? 3a) Spin it off into a daughter company (vertical split)? And have the parent start working on Linux applications? How do you explain all of that to your shareholders(doh)? to your market? What would be the effects on the parent company? Could have worked (but would have been unnecessary and suspicious) before Linux (really) entered the arena, but isn't a viable option any longer. 3b) 'Split it off'? (Horizontal split, Microsoft doesn't own stock of the new company) = the unthinkable, unless... Unless someone else does it FOR YOU. (After a 'brave' fight, of course...) Someone like JJ 'n' da DOJ, for instance. So Ballmer shouts:'Do NOT... S P L I T U S U P !'...rite... Of course MS will have to appeal/settle, so JJ comes up with a cool appendix: the IE corporation(???); to be appealed/settled away... And so MS gets its 2-way split into the Windows Corporation (WC, Flemish abbrev. for toilet) and Microsoft'sNotWindows Corporation (MSNWC). WC obviously develops and markets (and whatevers) the windows OS, while MSNWC focuses on all the other ex-MS products. Although some initial cooperation might occur, MSNWC quickly goes on to develop Linux (and *BSD,...?) versions of MS office, IE, games, etc. and even creates their own Microsoft'sNotWindowsLinux (what's in a name), effectively 'forcing' WC to open up the secret api's, to develop versions of windows for other platforms, or even go open source in a desperate attempt to stay ahead of the competition. Needless to say, windows will no longer be a threat to the long-term survival of the new MS, MSNWC. MSNWC (...to be continued) (Wonder if MSNWC's gonna be barred from OS development...)
from a european point of view, the us education system is a laugh. period.
wanna fix it? simple. have a look at how we do things in europe;-)
for high school curricula/courses that prepare for college/univ, focus ought to be on teaching people how to think/learn for most subjects, you can easily do that with manuals that are 25 years old... (but not for OOP for instance:-)
for curricula/courses that directly prepare for a job, it's evidently important that courses be as much up-to-date as possible...
about the chem teacher: his students could still get an excellent understanding of basic chemistry, but at least he should make an effort to tell the TRUTH, would suffice to simply say 'new elements have been and probably will be discovered'
electronic courses yet to 'evolve' will solve a lot of the 'updating' problems...
Forget Netscape. Forget AOL. Forget SUN. I could care less about these companies or ANY other company for that matter.
I'm currently using Netscape 4.06(!). ('Coz I got so accustomed to its crashes, I kinda consider it a feature now - I NEED 'em:)
And let me tell you somethin. I don't like monopolies. SO I CAN'T migrate to IEx.x, just 'coz it's a WHOLE LOT BETTER than my Netscape. (x.x >= 5.5)
BUT THE MASSES CAN, UNLESS you offer them A BETTER ALTERNATIVE. F A S T.
-which is: a FINISHED (NO BETA), COMPACT & FREE BROWSER that EQUALS or surpasses IEx.x on STABILITY, SECURITY & USER-FRIENDLINESS and OFFERS EVERY OFTEN-USED FEATURE that IEx.x does and that runs on Windoze and Linux
those are the MINIMUM requirements
don't care where it comes from (ANYTHIN BUT MSFT ofcrs) don't care about its name
does it have to be open-source? NO, but it would be GREAT if it were. And I believe it would also NEED to be for long-term 'survival'.
does it have to follow standards? (that is, not seek to extend them) NO, but I would very much appreciate if it did. Don't try to fight MSFT on its own terrain. Go for their weak spots. Security, stability, closed source. Cfr. Linux.
This is what I want. This is probably what a LOT of/. readers want. This is what's NEEDed to keep MSFT from monopolizing the browser market. This is what's NEEDed to make Linux a viable platform for the masses to browse the web. Oh you don't care about that right? You're not really into fightin MSFT over desktops eh? You just need your own little Tux in your own little desktop. Well you better START to care! The masses, you see, are so BRAINWASHed by years of MSFT marketing, they FORGOT they WANT and NEED C H O I C E. I WANT CHOICE. NOW and FOREVER. & THOSE WHO HAVE THE POWER TO CREATE CHOICE HAVE THE OBLIGATION TO DO SO.
I don't have that power. DO YOU?
Does Netscape 5.0 qualify? From what I hear, it doesn't. Does Opera qualify? NOPE, 'coz for one thing, it ain't free. Does Mozilla qualify? YOU TELL ME!
(And the next hurdle will be... a me$$enger-compatible instant messager...)
ok cool but my point is if say 90% (wild guess) of desktop users revert to m$n me$$enger which NEEDS windoze (so far) how hard would it be to create a m$n me$$enger-compatible messaging client that one wouldn't have to upgrade each and everyday (cfr aol vs m$) provided of course we'd want the desktop masses to migrate to linux... and how about wine haven't heard much bout that option yet doesn't seem to be any ref to me$$enger on their site, guess that's a njet ie5's got a 3 so that's a no go 2 comments?
Well said. To us Europeans, the US education system (education levels, entrance requirements, etc) looks like a JOKE. Only universities make a difference; and since US high schools don't breed enough students to get into them (the univs), there's plenty of room for us; hence all the foreign PhD students. Loads of $$$ simply go WASTED on so called 'college' education which really is high school (level) education in our opinion. All those US hypocrit politicians talkin 'bout Clinton's cigar play and ethics'n'stuff; what a laugh; they better focus on education, coz not fixin it is what's really undermining the long term power position of the US. PS: common high school curriculum in Flanders, Europe: languages & culture (Dutch, French, English, German, Latin and/or Greek), mathematics (lots of it, 4-8 hours a week), physics, chemistry, biology, art, history, geography, ethics (or religion), sports and i'm probably missin a couple more - go figure...
"On the other hand, those who have skills which are innate, whose abilities cannot be reproduced by formal methods, will continue to remain highly prized and well compensated forever."
... and those tend to be more into research and development, right? What worries me then: in the event of an economic recession (probably closer than any of us think), the first department to meet the axe is... the R&D department... Skilled workers will then have to compete with the not-so-skilled masses in places where hardcore skills are less in demand... forget high wages; if you're willing (and able) to be more productive for the same wage (as the not-so's), you stand a chance.
how about first evolving their bridge as they did requiring it to physically touch the target zone (theirs seems to just have to float over it?) next using this result as input for evolving towards symmetry next work towards minimum number/size of elements next make it load-bearing at the center etc and i think you'd be pretty close to a 'real' bridge,not?
Software needs strong adaptability to survive in the long term (like any other living being heh). OSS is the best way to achieve this. So if Solaris were free AND OSS, it would probably become a serious contender, yes. A bunch of OSS-developers would switch camps. Linux development hence would slow down initially, probably causing distro-fragmentation to lessen thru 'mergers' (is this a good thing?) and Linux would eventually still 'catch up' with Solaris. Focus would also be more on embedded Linux. Anyway, by then there's probably a whole new paradigm at play.
1) let's be honest, linux (or any other os, for that matter) can always get relatively (even) more nongeek-friendly.
2) articles are written about nongeeks having difficulty using (incl install) linux.
3a) developers are encouraged to make linux even more nongeek-friendly versus other os'es. 3b) some (ok, maybe lotsa) people are (still) scared out off tryin linux. remark: the magnitude of 3a) and 3b) is directly proportional to the 'magnitude' of 2)
4a)...developers goin about their stuff with even more determination... 4b)...nongeeks' patience with winboxes everything but increasing, desire to get better stuff probably increasing... remark: apology to the mac-folks for jumping over them in this slight oversimplification of things:-)
5) hey, linux just got relatively more user-friendly today!
6) somehow, the word gets out on 5) (perhaps an article on cnn.com?).
7) more people are tempted into trying out linux (again). [they are able to do so at little or no cost coz it runs on everything and is free.] some stick with it, others don't. this ratio is directly proportional to linux's relative user-friendliness.
8) go back to 1)
conclusion: - for the developers: keep doin what yer good at. - for the non-developers, relax.
pretty soon (within 2-3 years?), linux could be the easiest os to install and use in our solar system (chances are aliens have even better stuff).
Slashdot Mirror
MS's real problem isn't the DOJ or JudgeJackson(JJ), but windows itself. Windows increasingly is turning out to be a malignant cancer infecting MS's image and long term income potential. MS would have jumped on the Linux bandwagon eons ago if it weren't for windows... ...rite...
What are the options? 1)'fix' the problem; 2)kill/paralyze it; 3)cut it away.
2) is excluded for obvious reasons; 1) is economically and technically unviable, so only 3) is left: cut it away... but how?
3a) Spin it off into a daughter company (vertical split)? And have the parent start working on Linux applications? How do you explain that to your shareholders(doh)? to your market? What would be the effects on the parent company? Could have worked (but would have been unnecessary and suspicious) before Linux (really) entered the arena, but isn't a viable option any longer.
3b) 'Split it off'? (Horizontal split, Microsoft doesn't own stock of the new company) = the unthinkable, unless...
Unless someone else does it FOR YOU. (After a 'brave' fight, of course...)
Someone like JJ 'n' da DOJ, for instance.
So Ballmer shouts:'Do NOT... S P L I T U S U P !'
Of course MS will have to appeal/settle, so JJ comes up with a cool appendix: the IE corporation(???); to be appealed/settled away...
And so MS gets its 2-way split into the Windows Corporation (WC, Flemish abbrev. for toilet) and Microsoft'sNotWindows Corporation (MSNWC). WC obviously develops and markets (and whatevers) the windows OS, while MSNWC focuses on all the other ex-MS products. Although some initial cooperation might occur, MSNWC quickly goes on to develop Linux (and *BSD,...?) versions of MS office, IE, games, etc. and even creates their own Microsoft'sNotWindowsLinux (what's in a name), effectively 'forcing' WC to open up the secret api's, to develop versions of windows for other platforms, or even go open source in a desperate attempt to stay ahead of the competition. Needless to say, windows will no longer be a threat to the long-term survival of the new MS, MSNWC.
MSNWC (...to be continued)
(Wonder if MSNWC's gonna be barred from OS development...)
1984 -> 1 + 9 + 8 + 4 = 22 -> 2 + 2 = 4 = 1 + 3 -> 1 '2' + 3 '0's -> 2000 QED
[lameness filters suck]
MS's real problem isn't the DOJ or JudgeJackson(JJ), but windows itself. Windows increasingly is turning out to be a malignant cancer infecting MS's image and long term income potential. For instance, I'm convinced MS would have jumped on the Linux bandwagon eons ago if it weren't for windows... ...rite...
What are the options for treatment? 1)'fix' the problem; 2)kill/paralyze it; 3)cut it away.
2) is excluded for obvious reasons; 1) is economically and technically unviable, so only 3) is left: cut it away... but how?
3a) Spin it off into a daughter company (vertical split)? And have the parent start working on Linux applications? How do you explain all of that to your shareholders(doh)? to your market? What would be the effects on the parent company? Could have worked (but would have been unnecessary and suspicious) before Linux (really) entered the arena, but isn't a viable option any longer.
3b) 'Split it off'? (Horizontal split, Microsoft doesn't own stock of the new company) = the unthinkable, unless...
Unless someone else does it FOR YOU. (After a 'brave' fight, of course...)
Someone like JJ 'n' da DOJ, for instance.
So Ballmer shouts:'Do NOT... S P L I T U S U P !'
Of course MS will have to appeal/settle, so JJ comes up with a cool appendix: the IE corporation(???); to be appealed/settled away...
And so MS gets its 2-way split into the Windows Corporation (WC, Flemish abbrev. for toilet) and Microsoft'sNotWindows Corporation (MSNWC). WC obviously develops and markets (and whatevers) the windows OS, while MSNWC focuses on all the other ex-MS products. Although some initial cooperation might occur, MSNWC quickly goes on to develop Linux (and *BSD,...?) versions of MS office, IE, games, etc. and even creates their own Microsoft'sNotWindowsLinux (what's in a name), effectively 'forcing' WC to open up the secret api's, to develop versions of windows for other platforms, or even go open source in a desperate attempt to stay ahead of the competition. Needless to say, windows will no longer be a threat to the long-term survival of the new MS, MSNWC.
MSNWC (...to be continued)
(Wonder if MSNWC's gonna be barred from OS development...)
'nuff said
from a european point of view, the us education system is a laugh. period.
;-)
:-)
wanna fix it? simple. have a look at how we do things in europe
for high school curricula/courses that prepare for college/univ, focus ought to be on teaching people how to think/learn
for most subjects, you can easily do that with manuals that are 25 years old...
(but not for OOP for instance
for curricula/courses that directly prepare for a job, it's evidently important that courses be as much up-to-date as possible...
about the chem teacher:
his students could still get an excellent understanding of basic chemistry, but at least he should make an effort to tell the TRUTH,
would suffice to simply say 'new elements have been and probably will be discovered'
electronic courses yet to 'evolve' will solve a lot of the 'updating' problems...
Forget Netscape. Forget AOL. Forget SUN.
:)
/. readers want.
I could care less about these companies or ANY other company for that matter.
I'm currently using Netscape 4.06(!).
('Coz I got so accustomed to its crashes, I kinda consider it a feature now - I NEED 'em
And let me tell you somethin.
I don't like monopolies.
SO I CAN'T migrate to IEx.x, just 'coz it's a WHOLE LOT BETTER than my Netscape.
(x.x >= 5.5)
BUT THE MASSES CAN,
UNLESS you offer them A BETTER ALTERNATIVE. F A S T.
-which is:
a FINISHED (NO BETA), COMPACT & FREE BROWSER
that EQUALS or surpasses IEx.x on STABILITY, SECURITY & USER-FRIENDLINESS
and OFFERS EVERY OFTEN-USED FEATURE that IEx.x does
and that runs on Windoze and Linux
those are the MINIMUM requirements
don't care where it comes from (ANYTHIN BUT MSFT ofcrs)
don't care about its name
does it have to be open-source?
NO, but it would be GREAT if it were. And I believe it would also NEED to be for long-term 'survival'.
does it have to follow standards? (that is, not seek to extend them)
NO, but I would very much appreciate if it did. Don't try to fight MSFT on its own terrain.
Go for their weak spots. Security, stability, closed source. Cfr. Linux.
This is what I want.
This is probably what a LOT of
This is what's NEEDed to keep MSFT from monopolizing the browser market.
This is what's NEEDed to make Linux a viable platform for the masses to browse the web.
Oh you don't care about that right? You're not really into fightin MSFT over desktops eh?
You just need your own little Tux in your own little desktop.
Well you better START to care!
The masses, you see, are so BRAINWASHed by years of MSFT marketing,
they FORGOT they WANT and NEED C H O I C E.
I WANT CHOICE. NOW and FOREVER.
&
THOSE WHO HAVE THE POWER TO CREATE CHOICE
HAVE THE OBLIGATION TO DO SO.
I don't have that power. DO YOU?
Does Netscape 5.0 qualify? From what I hear, it doesn't.
Does Opera qualify? NOPE, 'coz for one thing, it ain't free.
Does Mozilla qualify? YOU TELL ME!
(And the next hurdle will be... a me$$enger-compatible instant messager...)
pls make that patents & trademarks
ok
cool
but my point is
if say 90% (wild guess) of desktop users revert to m$n me$$enger
which NEEDS windoze (so far)
how hard would it be to create a m$n me$$enger-compatible messaging client that one wouldn't have to upgrade each and everyday (cfr aol vs m$)
provided of course we'd want the desktop masses to migrate to linux...
and how about wine
haven't heard much bout that option yet
doesn't seem to be any ref to me$$enger on their site, guess that's a njet
ie5's got a 3 so that's a no go 2
comments?
friends of mine are dumping icq for msn messenger even though messenger has waaaay less features... etc
kinda like the beginnings of ie all over again...
icq vs. messenger = netscape vs. ie ?
instant messenger incompatibility might put another stranglehold on desktop-web-linux...
an even tougher one than ie-proprietary functions...
friends of mine are dumping icq for msn messenger even though messenger has waaaay less features... etc
kinda like the beginnings of ie all over again...
icq vs. messenger = netscape vs. ie ?
instant messenger incompatibility might put another stranglehold on desktop-web-linux...
an even tougher one than ie-proprietary functions...
Well said.
To us Europeans, the US education system (education levels, entrance requirements, etc) looks like a JOKE.
Only universities make a difference; and since US high schools don't breed enough students to get into them (the univs), there's plenty of room for us; hence all the foreign PhD students.
Loads of $$$ simply go WASTED on so called 'college' education which really is high school (level) education in our opinion.
All those US hypocrit politicians talkin 'bout Clinton's cigar play and ethics'n'stuff; what a laugh; they better focus on education, coz not fixin it is what's really undermining the long term power position of the US.
PS: common high school curriculum in Flanders, Europe: languages & culture (Dutch, French, English, German, Latin and/or Greek), mathematics (lots of it, 4-8 hours a week), physics, chemistry, biology, art, history, geography, ethics (or religion), sports and i'm probably missin a couple more - go figure...
"On the other hand, those who have skills which are innate, whose abilities cannot be reproduced by formal methods, will continue to remain highly prized and well compensated forever."
... and those tend to be more into research and development, right?
What worries me then: in the event of an economic recession (probably closer than any of us think), the first department to meet the axe is... the R&D department...
Skilled workers will then have to compete with the not-so-skilled masses in places where hardcore skills are less in demand... forget high wages; if you're willing (and able) to be more productive for the same wage (as the not-so's), you stand a chance.
how about first evolving their bridge as they did
requiring it to physically touch the target zone (theirs seems to just have to float over it?)
next using this result as input for evolving towards symmetry
next work towards minimum number/size of elements
next make it load-bearing at the center
etc
and i think you'd be pretty close to a 'real' bridge,not?
hmm, so much for MAD
i think i'll go sell iodine tablets
6 billion potential customers and increasing
pentagon pays for PR, how hard can it be?
Software needs strong adaptability to survive in the long term (like any other living being heh). OSS is the best way to achieve this. So if Solaris were free AND OSS, it would probably become a serious contender, yes. A bunch of OSS-developers would switch camps. Linux development hence would slow down initially, probably causing distro-fragmentation to lessen thru 'mergers' (is this a good thing?) and Linux would eventually still 'catch up' with Solaris. Focus would also be more on embedded Linux. Anyway, by then there's probably a whole new paradigm at play.
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Danny_Abramovitch/w rist/wrist.html
thx go out 2 Danny!
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Danny_Abramovitch/w rist/wrist.html
2) articles are written about nongeeks having difficulty using (incl install) linux.
3a) developers are encouraged to make linux even more nongeek-friendly versus other os'es.
3b) some (ok, maybe lotsa) people are (still) scared out off tryin linux.
remark: the magnitude of 3a) and 3b) is directly proportional to the 'magnitude' of 2)
4a) ...developers goin about their stuff with even more determination... ...nongeeks' patience with winboxes everything but increasing, desire to get better stuff probably increasing... :-)
4b)
remark: apology to the mac-folks for jumping over them in this slight oversimplification of things
5) hey, linux just got relatively more user-friendly today!
6) somehow, the word gets out on 5) (perhaps an article on cnn.com?).
7) more people are tempted into trying out linux (again). [they are able to do so at little or no cost coz it runs on everything and is free.] some stick with it, others don't. this ratio is directly proportional to linux's relative user-friendliness.
8) go back to 1)
conclusion:
- for the developers: keep doin what yer good at.
- for the non-developers, relax.
pretty soon (within 2-3 years?), linux could be the easiest os to install and use in our solar system (chances are aliens have even better stuff).
(the above also applies to functionality etc)
Flippo from Flanders (Europe).