I may be a little offtopic. But with all research and development focused on CISC architecture like x86, does this imply that curtains are down for RISC architectures such as IBM p5 and HP PA-RISC etc?
Nobody ever flogs a dead horse. Microsoft pays the price for being at the top of the heap. But there is certainly more to that. Not all companies at top are as mercilessly pilloried as Microsoft. But is there any other company in the world which treats its customers in the way Microsoft does? Probably not. Firstly, Microsoft thinks that its customers are dumb (Are you sure you want to do this? Windows recommends that you... etc etc). Secondly its always up there to grab you by the collar (Let's Activate Windows... Your copy of Windows is pirated...blah blah).
And as an interesting aside, Microsoft never innovated anything. From the Window based GUI to TCP/IP protocols, Xbox, Zune etc, MS never made anything on its own. It just lifed other's idea, polished it beyond recognition and claimed it as its own.
I don't think 'hate' should be the word to describe my feelings towards Microsoft but yes I certainly 'don't like' Microsoft.
Does this really qualify to be a headline? To ensure that any news receives maximum hits, all that one needs to do is to include one or all of the following keywords: Microsoft, Gates, Ballmer, Vista and IE7.
I don't understand. If I am not using government laid cables to send my message, why should I pay them. Going by this decision, they should also consider banning free e-mail service providers. Since they 'steal' revenue from the state-run postal service department.
This is actually true. The state-owned telecom company BSNL is expected to start it's VOIP services next month. So the message from govt. is: Want to use VOIP? Buy it from us otherwise it is illegal.
I graduated in Computer Science from India. In the final semester, we had a whole book dedicated to computer networking (Computer Networks: Andrew S Tanenbaum). We read about OSI layers, cryptography and all that stuff but heck we didn't know how to connect our PCs to Internet using dial-up modems.
Microsoft may not have the expertise to develop it's own protocols but has got enough market-muscle to decide which technology would be in vogue. Having said that, if Microsoft decides to embrace IPv6 in a big way, days of IPv4 may eventually come to an end. Bill Gates once said that there was no need for Windows to support TCP/IP. Eventually it was forced to adopt TCP/IP and called it Microsoft TCP/IP. So what's next? Microsoft IPv6??
After Oracle's Unbreakable Linux, this is second bad news for Red Hat. Novell is a company whose committment towards Open Source has always been suspect.
Cygwin commercial vs. Windows Unix tools, I think you're mis-understanding what each of those can do.
Thats right. "Windows services for Unix" only provides NFS client/server support to Windows nodes in Unix environment and a (primitive) Korn shell. And the NFS part is awful, you just can't use it in a commercial environment.
What would you do with OpenAIX? Will you port it to x86? What earthly purpose would that serve? Only that software shoould be opened which is of general public interest.
I first thought that this posting was a spoof only to check that it is real. This shows how low can AOL get. After sacking half of its workforce it wants to dig backyards. Is it not digging its own graveyard...?
There is no snapshot of the Unix standard proprietary desktop CDE. Either the author of the page did not consider CDE as a desktop (quite true) or probably he didn't know how to take a snapshot in CDE:).
Say what you will about Microsoft (heck, I do), but the company is at least deferential to its customers in public, about as far from smug as is humanly possible, and it very rarely takes pointed shots at the competition.
Remember the infamous "Get the Facts" campaign by Microsoft against Linux??
IBM is not teaming up with AMD merely for its technological superiority over Intel (if it is there). What IBM (also Sun & Dell) wants is to develop a viable alternative to monopoly of Intel and Microsoft in the ever-growing x86 server and desktop market. So while they are making a push for Linux in software, they are also endorsing AMD in hardware. Thats really good.
As an Indian I feel bad that the government here has backed out from this project. Had it been implemented only partially in India, it would have been a huge boost to free software (read damage to Microsoft & Co.)
The president of DEC VAX once said (almost two decades ago) "Two or three computers would be sufficient to meet the computing needs of the world". Bob Metcalfe (the inventor of Ethernet) had his own inhibitions against wireless networks. He once famously remarked "be wired and stay at home". When IETF designed IPv4 three decades ago they probably thought that it would be sufficient for the entire universe. Not only that, they wasted an entire block of 2^32 addresses in the name of loopback addresses. Going by that, one can safely put David Perlmutter's thinking in the same bracket.
Slashdot Mirror
Intel/Microsoft != Innovation. Their products might be the most successful in the year, but certainly not innovative.
I may be a little offtopic. But with all research and development focused on CISC architecture like x86, does this imply that curtains are down for RISC architectures such as IBM p5 and HP PA-RISC etc?
Nobody ever flogs a dead horse. Microsoft pays the price for being at the top of the heap. But there is certainly more to that. Not all companies at top are as mercilessly pilloried as Microsoft. But is there any other company in the world which treats its customers in the way Microsoft does? Probably not. Firstly, Microsoft thinks that its customers are dumb (Are you sure you want to do this? Windows recommends that you... etc etc). Secondly its always up there to grab you by the collar (Let's Activate Windows... Your copy of Windows is pirated...blah blah). And as an interesting aside, Microsoft never innovated anything. From the Window based GUI to TCP/IP protocols, Xbox, Zune etc, MS never made anything on its own. It just lifed other's idea, polished it beyond recognition and claimed it as its own. I don't think 'hate' should be the word to describe my feelings towards Microsoft but yes I certainly 'don't like' Microsoft.
Does this really qualify to be a headline? To ensure that any news receives maximum hits, all that one needs to do is to include one or all of the following keywords: Microsoft, Gates, Ballmer, Vista and IE7.
I don't understand. If I am not using government laid cables to send my message, why should I pay them. Going by this decision, they should also consider banning free e-mail service providers. Since they 'steal' revenue from the state-run postal service department.
This is actually true. The state-owned telecom company BSNL is expected to start it's VOIP services next month. So the message from govt. is: Want to use VOIP? Buy it from us otherwise it is illegal.
I graduated in Computer Science from India. In the final semester, we had a whole book dedicated to computer networking (Computer Networks: Andrew S Tanenbaum). We read about OSI layers, cryptography and all that stuff but heck we didn't know how to connect our PCs to Internet using dial-up modems.
How do I lose "loose" ? :)
What would Solaris get? Well didn't it get Mozilla and GNOME?
Microsoft may not have the expertise to develop it's own protocols but has got enough market-muscle to decide which technology would be in vogue. Having said that, if Microsoft decides to embrace IPv6 in a big way, days of IPv4 may eventually come to an end. Bill Gates once said that there was no need for Windows to support TCP/IP. Eventually it was forced to adopt TCP/IP and called it Microsoft TCP/IP. So what's next? Microsoft IPv6??
After Oracle's Unbreakable Linux, this is second bad news for Red Hat. Novell is a company whose committment towards Open Source has always been suspect.
Well, the ISP can always keep a backup of the logs before deleting them. Who's going to check anyway :).
Perhaps he has used Frontpage intentionally just to show that software really sucks :).
Cygwin commercial vs. Windows Unix tools, I think you're mis-understanding what each of those can do. Thats right. "Windows services for Unix" only provides NFS client/server support to Windows nodes in Unix environment and a (primitive) Korn shell. And the NFS part is awful, you just can't use it in a commercial environment.
What would you do with OpenAIX? Will you port it to x86? What earthly purpose would that serve? Only that software shoould be opened which is of general public interest.
I first thought that this posting was a spoof only to check that it is real. This shows how low can AOL get. After sacking half of its workforce it wants to dig backyards. Is it not digging its own graveyard...?
There is no snapshot of the Unix standard proprietary desktop CDE. Either the author of the page did not consider CDE as a desktop (quite true) or probably he didn't know how to take a snapshot in CDE :).
Say what you will about Microsoft (heck, I do), but the company is at least deferential to its customers in public, about as far from smug as is humanly possible, and it very rarely takes pointed shots at the competition.
Remember the infamous "Get the Facts" campaign by Microsoft against Linux??
Killers do work. Microsoft for instance has only killed its rival's products (by plagiarizing them) rather than coming up original idea.
IBM is not teaming up with AMD merely for its technological superiority over Intel (if it is there). What IBM (also Sun & Dell) wants is to develop a viable alternative to monopoly of Intel and Microsoft in the ever-growing x86 server and desktop market. So while they are making a push for Linux in software, they are also endorsing AMD in hardware. Thats really good.
As an Indian I feel bad that the government here has backed out from this project. Had it been implemented only partially in India, it would have been a huge boost to free software (read damage to Microsoft & Co.)
The president of DEC VAX once said (almost two decades ago) "Two or three computers would be sufficient to meet the computing needs of the world". Bob Metcalfe (the inventor of Ethernet) had his own inhibitions against wireless networks. He once famously remarked "be wired and stay at home". When IETF designed IPv4 three decades ago they probably thought that it would be sufficient for the entire universe. Not only that, they wasted an entire block of 2^32 addresses in the name of loopback addresses. Going by that, one can safely put David Perlmutter's thinking in the same bracket.