This sort of suit (aside from the patents) has already been tried years ago by Apple. It is destined to fail, miserably. It will cost them a lot of money. As a company Apple is beginning to show it sucketh.
I was going to say that if anyone has experience with the Kinect they'd know that it is a difficult tool to use in order to select things. I can't imagine going back and forth scrolling thumbnail art and making selections. Talk about super slow and unresponsive. Work needs to be done on the Kinect before it really can be considered a good input tool.
As far as games go, it seems OK. It is responsive enough while in the game, but when outside choosing items on the screen, well, it lacks, a lot.
Android is Linux. It may have a different user managed interface, but it is Linux. And, to claim it's a monster is to essential reveal yourself as a wolf in sheep's clothing.
A buddy of mine came back from Alaska where he was making claims that some aspects of Linux just sucks, especially having to deal with the command-line. To this I showed him some examples. Since I have quite a few Linux boxes in my shop I showed him how I can SSH into them and do all the updates without having to get up from my main computer to do it. After that I gave him some examples of how to configure something using the mouse and dialog boxes, such as adding a new apt repository, adding the authentication, updating the indexes and doing the installation--and then again with the CLI. Then I showed him how to remove a package. Quickly he began to understand that searching a menu to find what you want, then launching the program, searching the dialog box for what you are after, then applying the task can take longer and be more confusing.
Though the GUI is the primary interface for most tasks, as it should be, it certainly is nice to know that the quick commands are available to simplify my day, to be that convenient convenience that allows me to get some tasks completed, without running around.
Pulse audio has been fixed and it works very well now. The problem was with the developer, the main man behind it, he wouldn't admit to the problems and blamed the configuration. Even if it was partially the fault of the configuration it was mainly his fault for not admitting it quickly enough to fix the problems with getting it configured correctly. He flat out denied the issues.
But, it is good to see it is working correctly now and seems to shine. And, at least pulse audio issues were far fewer than those with Microsoft's high def audio bus drivers. Now that was a nightmare.
This guy's analogy is obscene. Kicking a puppy is something I'd never do, but Microsoft? Well, they are convicted criminal predatory monopolist. IMHO they ripped off the consumer and still do to this day. Most of our woes in computing are caused directly by them. They deserve the negative attention they get.
What this guy's statement told me is that he doesn't care about Linux on the desktop. He's happy about networking and mobile computing and all the other devices it's in, but he has no desire to help overcome the one area where Microsoft has all it's power, which influences everyone's spending--the desktop.
So, yes, the battle wages on. Hopefully, without the philosophy of this guy.
Programs such as those come out of student fees which are already quite high. Most communities have these types programs, so creating them at the institution of higher learning would duplicate what is offered already by the community at additional cost to the students. Students generally feel that if they are going to be taxed by Student Fee programs that the institution at least address these problems first in the community without duplicating the services.
Having a wireless router is not an indication of copyright infringement. So, either they are a failure at law or both law and being an institution of learning.
How does a student at BC use their smart phone, wireless PS3, their laptop, their wireless printer without a router? Having one makes them a target of the campus authorities policing infringement? How about the fact that most students share a room and have friends over for gaming sessions? Even if they did modify/remove it, the implications are/were the same--false stereotyping that wireless router users are probably guilty of copyright infringement.
Why would an (in)secure router be any of Boston College's (BC) business? It isn't a service to spread around false notions. If your router is properly secured, few will have enough knowledge about how to break into it and do you wrong. Remember, they were telling them to forget having a router (and, how does a dorm room with more than one student share their internet connection between their desktop, their wireless printer, their laptop, their wireless PS3, their smart phone, etc., without a router?). They didn't tell them to secure their routers. They seem to be operating on behalf of the entertainment industry using the industry's failed logic--remember they were the ones that said that copyright infringement funds money laundering efforts and leads to terrorism.
BC has no more business being involved in that than they do in policing other activities similar activities.
For instance, the same could be said about their CD/DVD copying programs or the use of the photo copier. You don't see the would-be authorities go after BC when students are caught copying copyrighted works on campus copiers. So much fuss isn't seen when students use campus computer equipment to make a copy of a music CD or movie DVD ("BC--lock those down or we'll sue you"). Or how about the blue boxes Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak sold to dorm residents at Stanford? Do you think the whole industry went crazy after Stanford for the actions of their students making illegal long distance calls? Back then calling long distance was incredibly expensive. My point is that it is none of BC's business to make claims such as this in such an inflammatory manner with such unprovable diatribe.
This points to the fact that their argument does not address other things, instead it focuses just on one method where copyright infringement could take place--and even if it did, remember, they'd still have to prove it in a court of law.
And, again, we lock our routers down for that purpose and only lend it out to those we trust. Since when has one kid that got another in trouble ever felt moral enough to apologize? Don't you think kids understand that?
Though it can be read that way, it is stupid to even conceive adding that to the document, for it just puts fear in the student body and lacks any real merit--of which the student body would wrongly judge.
The point is that wireless routers can be locked down. Wireless routers are everywhere in almost all homes and businesses. There's no need to tell them not to have one because it leads them to draw conclusions that are NOT realistic.
They should have prefaced it with the fact that the router should be secured and that they should only share it with other students that are not likely to get them in trouble. Hell, anyone can loan their car out, but you'll only loan it to those you trust that won't use it to commit a crime (not that copyright infringement is a crime because it isn't (only distribution of copyrighted material is)), or cause an accident that results in harm or death.
I've seen it listed in their online updates too. I'm not sure if it's an update to the product they are trying to distribute, but it doesn't seem so as the Bing toolbar is part of their Live Essentials platform, and is generally installed and updated through that. In the cases I'm talking about Bing was listed with all the other updates.
It wasn't long ago that Microsoft claimed they would usurp Google in the same way they usurped Netscape, at least in part in how they distribute their IE software. Recently Microsoft was touted as being one of the most ethical company nowadays. Whoever wrote that was being unrealistic and untruthful. But then again, Microsoft can buy publicity. The only reason I can think that Microsoft would get such a rating is that the rest of the business world has been acting so unethically that it makes Microsoft seem moderate--so many bad apples that we praise the lesser of the evils.
It has nothing to do with stupid digg-like comments. Slashdot is, IMHO, just more factually oriented. Google's search is vastly superior to Bing in so many ways in the opinion of so many.
Like Amazon's cloud drive doesn't work properly on Google's Chrome. You an do whatever with the data once it's up there but uploading it fails miserably (whether it is on Linux or Windows). That just one example of how some high profile sites might work on one platform (browser platform) but not on others.
In other news Microsoft makes it difficult for competitors to use their tools for developing DirectX applications unlike with their own products that can use them and take full advantage of them.
What the hell kind of argument is Microsoft trying to make? They do this all the time against their competitors. For example, development of DirectX on other platforms such as Linux or Macintosh?
Google's search and the use of Youtube isn't central to communications between competing platforms. What Microsoft was accused of in the EU was intentionally making it impossible to write interoperability into one of the fundamental aspects of computer operating systems -- networking.
And, nothing keeps Microsoft from using youtube on their phone, it's just that the searches come up in mobile computing formatted pages rather than in a customized tailored program. Once the user locates the desired video they can play the youtube videos on their WP7.
Microsoft isn't going to give anyone full access to use the XBOX live service on other platforms and I'm sure they aren't going to provide the same feature set to the Android platform that they provide for their Win Phone 7.
The Xoom isn't creating a long term contract-like restriction for the software.
Thermal is important to devices like that. Heat is a huge factor in designing a computer and it seems to be endlessly redesigned. Just look at ASUS boards over the past 5 years. So, yes, once they set the thermal design then it's just a matter of finding the right chipsets from the right vendor that does what you want and meets your thermal design.
I don't know why I am even responding. Nothing you said indicated to me that you were thinking, and certainly no thought was outside the box for you. I'm sorry. You're just better off keeping it shut. Again, I'm sorry, but you just don't have a clue.
Or, someone they bought and paid for with her prior employment and probable re-employment after she's either impeached or retires.
Did it not occur to anyone that the music cartel is using the same tactics that the Church of Scientology uses? First they couldn't get their tax exempt ruling, and only after infiltrating the government agencies getting their parishioners placed in responsible roles did they finally get the tax exempt state. That's what's happen here. Once noticed your eyes are wide open.
You are confusing moving data from one media to another with moving data from one person to another. The latter is known as distribution, the former is not, not even infringement. Not that I'm claiming you are in the outfield, I'm pointing out the difference between criminal distribution and fair use.
It's easier to turn off a feature than to shut down a service. You spend much more money designing a service than you do a feature of another product.
And, they'd probably have won, though I'm sure there was a lot of other forms of pressure exerted against Amazon in contrast to face-forward influences we all saw publicly reported.
I see netbooks sold in virtually every computer related store I visit. Sales may be down but they are being sold. Tablets on the other hand are not found in every store I visit. I almost never see tablets on display or for sale.
Slashdot Mirror
This sort of suit (aside from the patents) has already been tried years ago by Apple. It is destined to fail, miserably. It will cost them a lot of money. As a company Apple is beginning to show it sucketh.
This is the government attacking it's citizens over their opinions and beliefs, nearly making it an illegal act. That's fascism.
Paid radio hasn't succeeded it has just survived. Paid Spotify won't pay the bills. This is a death knell for Spotify--they don't know it, but it is.
I was going to say that if anyone has experience with the Kinect they'd know that it is a difficult tool to use in order to select things. I can't imagine going back and forth scrolling thumbnail art and making selections. Talk about super slow and unresponsive. Work needs to be done on the Kinect before it really can be considered a good input tool.
As far as games go, it seems OK. It is responsive enough while in the game, but when outside choosing items on the screen, well, it lacks, a lot.
You should be modded as a troll or as flaimbait.
Android is Linux. It may have a different user managed interface, but it is Linux. And, to claim it's a monster is to essential reveal yourself as a wolf in sheep's clothing.
A buddy of mine came back from Alaska where he was making claims that some aspects of Linux just sucks, especially having to deal with the command-line. To this I showed him some examples. Since I have quite a few Linux boxes in my shop I showed him how I can SSH into them and do all the updates without having to get up from my main computer to do it. After that I gave him some examples of how to configure something using the mouse and dialog boxes, such as adding a new apt repository, adding the authentication, updating the indexes and doing the installation--and then again with the CLI. Then I showed him how to remove a package. Quickly he began to understand that searching a menu to find what you want, then launching the program, searching the dialog box for what you are after, then applying the task can take longer and be more confusing.
Though the GUI is the primary interface for most tasks, as it should be, it certainly is nice to know that the quick commands are available to simplify my day, to be that convenient convenience that allows me to get some tasks completed, without running around.
Pulse audio has been fixed and it works very well now. The problem was with the developer, the main man behind it, he wouldn't admit to the problems and blamed the configuration. Even if it was partially the fault of the configuration it was mainly his fault for not admitting it quickly enough to fix the problems with getting it configured correctly. He flat out denied the issues.
But, it is good to see it is working correctly now and seems to shine. And, at least pulse audio issues were far fewer than those with Microsoft's high def audio bus drivers. Now that was a nightmare.
This guy's analogy is obscene. Kicking a puppy is something I'd never do, but Microsoft? Well, they are convicted criminal predatory monopolist. IMHO they ripped off the consumer and still do to this day. Most of our woes in computing are caused directly by them. They deserve the negative attention they get.
What this guy's statement told me is that he doesn't care about Linux on the desktop. He's happy about networking and mobile computing and all the other devices it's in, but he has no desire to help overcome the one area where Microsoft has all it's power, which influences everyone's spending--the desktop.
So, yes, the battle wages on. Hopefully, without the philosophy of this guy.
This is almost as bad a practical joke as saying that Linus Torvalds was hired as the main kernel developer by Microsoft.
And, as someone pointed out Netflix doesn't run on Linux. Pot kettle black.
Programs such as those come out of student fees which are already quite high. Most communities have these types programs, so creating them at the institution of higher learning would duplicate what is offered already by the community at additional cost to the students. Students generally feel that if they are going to be taxed by Student Fee programs that the institution at least address these problems first in the community without duplicating the services.
Having a wireless router is not an indication of copyright infringement. So, either they are a failure at law or both law and being an institution of learning.
How does a student at BC use their smart phone, wireless PS3, their laptop, their wireless printer without a router? Having one makes them a target of the campus authorities policing infringement? How about the fact that most students share a room and have friends over for gaming sessions? Even if they did modify/remove it, the implications are/were the same--false stereotyping that wireless router users are probably guilty of copyright infringement.
Why would an (in)secure router be any of Boston College's (BC) business? It isn't a service to spread around false notions. If your router is properly secured, few will have enough knowledge about how to break into it and do you wrong. Remember, they were telling them to forget having a router (and, how does a dorm room with more than one student share their internet connection between their desktop, their wireless printer, their laptop, their wireless PS3, their smart phone, etc., without a router?). They didn't tell them to secure their routers. They seem to be operating on behalf of the entertainment industry using the industry's failed logic--remember they were the ones that said that copyright infringement funds money laundering efforts and leads to terrorism.
BC has no more business being involved in that than they do in policing other activities similar activities.
For instance, the same could be said about their CD/DVD copying programs or the use of the photo copier. You don't see the would-be authorities go after BC when students are caught copying copyrighted works on campus copiers. So much fuss isn't seen when students use campus computer equipment to make a copy of a music CD or movie DVD ("BC--lock those down or we'll sue you"). Or how about the blue boxes Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak sold to dorm residents at Stanford? Do you think the whole industry went crazy after Stanford for the actions of their students making illegal long distance calls? Back then calling long distance was incredibly expensive. My point is that it is none of BC's business to make claims such as this in such an inflammatory manner with such unprovable diatribe.
This points to the fact that their argument does not address other things, instead it focuses just on one method where copyright infringement could take place--and even if it did, remember, they'd still have to prove it in a court of law.
And, again, we lock our routers down for that purpose and only lend it out to those we trust. Since when has one kid that got another in trouble ever felt moral enough to apologize? Don't you think kids understand that?
Though it can be read that way, it is stupid to even conceive adding that to the document, for it just puts fear in the student body and lacks any real merit--of which the student body would wrongly judge.
The point is that wireless routers can be locked down. Wireless routers are everywhere in almost all homes and businesses. There's no need to tell them not to have one because it leads them to draw conclusions that are NOT realistic.
They should have prefaced it with the fact that the router should be secured and that they should only share it with other students that are not likely to get them in trouble. Hell, anyone can loan their car out, but you'll only loan it to those you trust that won't use it to commit a crime (not that copyright infringement is a crime because it isn't (only distribution of copyrighted material is)), or cause an accident that results in harm or death.
I've seen it listed in their online updates too. I'm not sure if it's an update to the product they are trying to distribute, but it doesn't seem so as the Bing toolbar is part of their Live Essentials platform, and is generally installed and updated through that. In the cases I'm talking about Bing was listed with all the other updates.
It wasn't long ago that Microsoft claimed they would usurp Google in the same way they usurped Netscape, at least in part in how they distribute their IE software. Recently Microsoft was touted as being one of the most ethical company nowadays. Whoever wrote that was being unrealistic and untruthful. But then again, Microsoft can buy publicity. The only reason I can think that Microsoft would get such a rating is that the rest of the business world has been acting so unethically that it makes Microsoft seem moderate--so many bad apples that we praise the lesser of the evils.
It has nothing to do with stupid digg-like comments. Slashdot is, IMHO, just more factually oriented. Google's search is vastly superior to Bing in so many ways in the opinion of so many.
Like Amazon's cloud drive doesn't work properly on Google's Chrome. You an do whatever with the data once it's up there but uploading it fails miserably (whether it is on Linux or Windows). That just one example of how some high profile sites might work on one platform (browser platform) but not on others.
In other news Microsoft makes it difficult for competitors to use their tools for developing DirectX applications unlike with their own products that can use them and take full advantage of them.
What the hell kind of argument is Microsoft trying to make? They do this all the time against their competitors. For example, development of DirectX on other platforms such as Linux or Macintosh?
Google's search and the use of Youtube isn't central to communications between competing platforms. What Microsoft was accused of in the EU was intentionally making it impossible to write interoperability into one of the fundamental aspects of computer operating systems -- networking.
And, nothing keeps Microsoft from using youtube on their phone, it's just that the searches come up in mobile computing formatted pages rather than in a customized tailored program. Once the user locates the desired video they can play the youtube videos on their WP7.
Microsoft isn't going to give anyone full access to use the XBOX live service on other platforms and I'm sure they aren't going to provide the same feature set to the Android platform that they provide for their Win Phone 7.
Their argument is specious.
The Xoom isn't creating a long term contract-like restriction for the software.
Thermal is important to devices like that. Heat is a huge factor in designing a computer and it seems to be endlessly redesigned. Just look at ASUS boards over the past 5 years. So, yes, once they set the thermal design then it's just a matter of finding the right chipsets from the right vendor that does what you want and meets your thermal design.
I don't know why I am even responding. Nothing you said indicated to me that you were thinking, and certainly no thought was outside the box for you. I'm sorry. You're just better off keeping it shut. Again, I'm sorry, but you just don't have a clue.
And the Judge issuing them should be impeached for incompetence.
Or, someone they bought and paid for with her prior employment and probable re-employment after she's either impeached or retires.
Did it not occur to anyone that the music cartel is using the same tactics that the Church of Scientology uses? First they couldn't get their tax exempt ruling, and only after infiltrating the government agencies getting their parishioners placed in responsible roles did they finally get the tax exempt state. That's what's happen here. Once noticed your eyes are wide open.
You are confusing moving data from one media to another with moving data from one person to another. The latter is known as distribution, the former is not, not even infringement. Not that I'm claiming you are in the outfield, I'm pointing out the difference between criminal distribution and fair use.
It's easier to turn off a feature than to shut down a service. You spend much more money designing a service than you do a feature of another product.
And, they'd probably have won, though I'm sure there was a lot of other forms of pressure exerted against Amazon in contrast to face-forward influences we all saw publicly reported.
I see netbooks sold in virtually every computer related store I visit. Sales may be down but they are being sold. Tablets on the other hand are not found in every store I visit. I almost never see tablets on display or for sale.