Microsoft's biggest enemy is not Linux nor Apple but is rather Microsoft itself. Microsoft's entire business model is built on growth and expansion. They have now saturated the desktop and a major portion of the server market....
I fully agree. And then add the fact that they haven't been successful (in the economic sense) when trying to branch out in different directions. They tried getting into the television market a couple of years ago but scrapped that. The Xbox has only been one big economic sinkhole. Their mobile systems division has never made a profit either.
So they are hard pressed to squeeze as much as they can from their saturated market.
...If the Segway was introduced at $500 instead of $5000, it would have changed the world. Technologially, there doesn't seem to be anything about these things that absolutely prevent them being made at a marginal cost of less than $500...
I beg to differ. Take the batteries for example... replacement batteries seem to be some $600. Even if there is a really significant markup (which there no doubt is) I seriously doubt you could get some for, say $250.
Also compare with something that's already produced and marketed in a highly competetive worldwide market: economy style (supermarkets etc) bicylcles. They are made in enormous quantities and there's hardly any technological difficulties in sourcing and assembling them. Yet you can't find them for less than $200 around here (I consider that dirt cheap anyway).
Fact stands as so many have stated: it's over-engineered.
While I agree that what you said is true of some cults there are some that aren't about personal gain in one way or another. Best cult definition I've come a cross is that a cult is an organization that has all the following characteristics:
- it is not non-democratically ruled - you cannot as an outsider discren how the organisation works/is structured - they demonize outsiders, especially those who in any way critizise them
With the kind of captial investment -- not to mention criminal activity -- required to generate that level of spam, you're better off taking the same investment and throwing it in a CD or Money Market account. 6% is fairly pathetic.
Schwab
Ehum? Did you really think they meant by yearly basis? No, they meant per "spam high" incident. Now, do a handful of fast ones (in a few months perhaps since it takes the regulators a while to catch on) then it might be very profitable considering the risk and punishment. Much less risky than say financing a drug deal, it's just a white collar crime. Wouldn't be surprised if some people with grey money are backers behind scams like these.
"Sounds more like someone made a build of SBS with one or more components from the dev branch instead of actual release versions"
Do you have any evidence that such a thing happened. Shurly there can only one dev branch what ever that is and wouldn't a newer component have less bugs than an earlier version. And finally are 'non-final core components' the same thing as bugs.
No, I have no evidence and that's why I said "Sounds more like":)
About having less bugs, there's no natural law that says a newer version has to have less bugs. Think of it this way: when do most bugs occur? My answer is: when you start adding and extend functionality to the program. When you prepare to make a release you draw a line and say "Ok, NO more NEW stuff is allowed to go into the program... now we really concetrate on doing quality assurance on it". This on the other hand doesn't mean that development on the NEXT verions after this hasn't already started some time ago.. so quality testing of version N goes on at the same time as new stuff is being put into version N+1.
I wouldn't call "non-final core components" buggy by default but it's just that since they're new they might be and you haven't tested them in the same fashion as release version.
Of course what really happened we might never know. But I'm sticking with my theory (for now:)
es, but it could cause a few distros not to even officially support it anymore. I could easily see Ubuntu dropping it b/c of this...
MythTV being targeted by this would make them drop it but modularization would make it very practical and viable to keep it in the distros. Compare with VLC... no way that Ubuntu, for example, would include it in the distro if it statically included or absolutely required to link to libdvdcss2. But as things are now they can include VLC with no problem.
I'm more concerned about what this means for projects like MythTV...
If MythTV or some other project gets targeted by stuff like this there will always be ways around it. Modularize the system enough to have the major apps hosted in the US (where the problem is). Host rest of prohibited modules where the rest of the world can enjoy them... different game, same tactics as the brightly conceived crypto export regulations
Of course this would be a setback for the projects but it wouldn't be enough to kill them.
...What do you think the odds of joe schmoe trying to compile the latest kernel getting help from those guys are though? In my experience I've found there's a VERY large void between the lemmings and the experts at HP, and 9 times out of 10, you get stuck in that void trying to get support.
As I said, only time will tell. But this isn't a service for Joe Shmoe. It's only available for HP Integrity and HP Proliant servers with some HP specific programs added to the Debian install. Which most likely means it will not be cheap and cheerful but expensive and serious (as 24x7 support is when it works)
And I would also say that HP seems to have way more than a fleeting interest in Debian. Debian IS their internal development platform company wide and has been since about 2002. They had to pick one distro because there were to many different ones used all over the company. So it's just not just "those guys" that have linux experience, those are only the visible to the outside.
And HP also runs QA testing on servers to make sure they actually work as well.
HP can barely handle the point and click associated with RHEL and Windows. I'm at a loss as to who in that company is going to support Debian. I know it's surely not their L1 or L2 phone techs.
Only time will tell I guess but they do have the know-how in the company... since Debian is used as an internal development platform for Linux and they also host one full primary mirror site.
HP also has a handful of employees that are Debian developers.
Not an expert but I belive most antennas aren't transmitting in a spherical pattern since that would be a waste of radio energy since you're much more likely to have a connection far away on the horisontal plane than on the vertical one. Some APs also have turnable antennas which would make little sense if it was a spherical radiation pattern.
As for being dangerous to flying over planes?
Don't think so. Then a malfuctioning microwave oven would be a lot more of an hazard to flights (same frequency range if we're talking about 11b/g). And remember that radiation diminishes with the square of the distance from the antenna.
SCO have been dragging their feet because they've been forced too.
Except that the courts aren't quite as Perry Masonesque as you seem to think they are. IBM would have gotten about the same time to ponder the allegations if the case had proceded according to schedule instead of being postponed ad nausem. So that argument doesn't hold much water. Actually, by delaying SCOX has give IBM even MORE time to get its ducks in a row.
And a lot of SCOX claims have already been thrown out because of lacking specificity. Seems their "trump card" coming along to well. To quote Judge Wells:
"Does SCO have, can they provide, additional specificity?... I mean, basically, is this all you've got?"
And this was after SCOX had submitted their experts report on the infringement.
SCO was a strong company back when they had the only commercial UNIX on Intel. They had a big presence in small companies, support from hardware vendors, and good customer service. If they would have just embraced Linux instead of seeing it as a threat, they could have been the major player in Linux for business. They just had really bad, shortsighted leadership.
Except that The SCO Group (SCOX) isn't that company. It's the company that used to be know as Caldera who bought the UNIX business from OldSCO. From what I've gathered they wanted to use the huge amounts of VARs that used SCO UNIX and push Caldera as the OS of choice instead. Apparently that didn't pan out as planned (maybe because many of the VARs were rather small and couldn't change course without significant costs).
A smaller company sues a larger one. The larger company spends so much on lawyers that it drains the resources of the smaller company, crippling the company until they can't fight any more
Except that in THIS case it's the smaller company that's been dragging it's feet at EVERY step of the way.
So IBM hasn't done "something like this".
Who knows... but it doesn't look good for the smaller artists I guess.
To quote Janis Ian:
...from personal experience: in 37 years as a recording artist, I've created 25+ albums for major labels, and I've never once received a royalty check that didn't show I owed them money. So I make the bulk of my living from live touring, playing for 80-1500 people a night, doing my own show.
And she goes on to state her opinion on the downloads as:
Who gets hurt by free downloads? Save a handful of super-successes like Celine Dion, none of us. We only get helped.
All things considered, it is good to have a tour-winner again who is not specializing in this event and does other courses too, unlike the specialist Lance Armstrong. The fact that he only competed in the Tour took the shine off his victories. It seems fairer this way.
Armstrong was a truly great cyclist. But I'll agree that him being a one trick pony when it came to races places him under people like Miguel Indurain. I've talked with people who have admired his multi-win streak and when I've said "Yeah, he's good but I think Indurain was better" and have them go "Indu-who?"
For those that don't know. Indurain won 5 consecutive Tour de France races 91-95 and Giro d'Italia 92-93 (not that many double winners in the history). He also set a World Hour Record in 94.
rather thought that the destiny of the initial cells was known out to about a month- perhaps I'm confusing humans and C. elegans, which i am certain has been fully documented. I'm a tad bit tipsy at the moment- perhaps this tequila worm could tell me, if it weren't pickeled...
When your blood alcohol comes down you'll probably realise that you're not going to find much likeness regarding brain development between humans and C. Elegans. Because they don't have much of a brain... in fact they're lacking circulatory and respiratory systems as well.
There was one proper torture test done by the UK Digital Camera Shopper magazine where they dipped in cola, run through a washing machine, dunked in coffee, trampled and then for sport hit with a sledgehammer and then nailed to a tree. They didn't survive the last two tests though...
Yes because I'm sure this will be the only growth Google sees in the next 166 years.
Totally agree with you there that Google will continue to grow.
Acutally I don't see no reason why Google shoulde become as big as Microsoft (no, just as big, not the NEXT Microsoft), Currently Google has the a revenue that's about 1/6 of Microsofts and a market value that's roughly half. Profit margin looks good as well even if it's 3/4 of Microsoft. On the other hand O think Google stands a better chance of continued expansion and renewal than Microsoft which has had a bad trackrecord (financially) with trying to expand into new areas after pretty much saturating the desktop niche and facing stiffer competition on servers.
Will Googles stock rise even higher though? Don't think so.
Am I alone in not being attracted by all these bells and whistles phones have these days? I want a phone to be a phone - I already have a digital camera to take pictures, and a music player to play music. Why try to cram all these features into a mobile phone, which just complicates the user interface and adds cost?
No, you're not alone but you're relativly marginal in low margin segment.
Compare with computers or cars that only really basic features, like a computer with no frills at all or low end asian econo-box cars. They don't sell that well since they don't cost THAT much less. With a low-end product you need to sell a lot to recoupe your investment since per item return is low along with the fact that it's easier for other companies to jump on the bandwagon should it start rolling. And then you would have every Tom, Dick and Harry eating at the table you set.
And them, of course cellphone operators only offer subsidizes phones that are likely to increase the use of their services. I guess the way to go for people like you is cash cards and buy your own basic phone. You're just not profitable as a group to, in the eyes of the operators, to justify a subsidizes phone.
Cash transfer. As I've mentioned before they paid the anti-competition fine (497 million euro) and are now appealing that. This fine is for non-compliance which they will of course appeal as well. But I guess they will pay it.
Slashdot Mirror
I fully agree. And then add the fact that they haven't been successful (in the economic sense) when trying to branch out in different directions. They tried getting into the television market a couple of years ago but scrapped that. The Xbox has only been one big economic sinkhole. Their mobile systems division has never made a profit either.
So they are hard pressed to squeeze as much as they can from their saturated market.
Also compare with something that's already produced and marketed in a highly competetive worldwide market: economy style (supermarkets etc) bicylcles. They are made in enormous quantities and there's hardly any technological difficulties in sourcing and assembling them. Yet you can't find them for less than $200 around here (I consider that dirt cheap anyway).
Fact stands as so many have stated: it's over-engineered.
While I agree that what you said is true of some cults there are some that aren't about personal gain in one way or another. Best cult definition I've come a cross is that a cult is an organization that has all the following characteristics:
- it is not non-democratically ruled
- you cannot as an outsider discren how the organisation works/is structured
- they demonize outsiders, especially those who in any way critizise them
Ehum? Did you really think they meant by yearly basis? No, they meant per "spam high" incident. Now, do a handful of fast ones (in a few months perhaps since it takes the regulators a while to catch on) then it might be very profitable considering the risk and punishment. Much less risky than say financing a drug deal, it's just a white collar crime. Wouldn't be surprised if some people with grey money are backers behind scams like these.
...expansion slot. Less capacity and more expensive at the moment.
No, I have no evidence and that's why I said "Sounds more like"
About having less bugs, there's no natural law that says a newer version has to have less bugs. Think of it this way: when do most bugs occur? My answer is: when you start adding and extend functionality to the program. When you prepare to make a release you draw a line and say "Ok, NO more NEW stuff is allowed to go into the program... now we really concetrate on doing quality assurance on it". This on the other hand doesn't mean that development on the NEXT verions after this hasn't already started some time ago.. so quality testing of version N goes on at the same time as new stuff is being put into version N+1.
I wouldn't call "non-final core components" buggy by default but it's just that since they're new they might be and you haven't tested them in the same fashion as release version.
Of course what really happened we might never know. But I'm sticking with my theory (for now
Sounds more like someone made a build of SBS with one or more components from the dev branch instead of actual release versions.
Of course this would be a setback for the projects but it wouldn't be enough to kill them.
As I said, only time will tell. But this isn't a service for Joe Shmoe. It's only available for HP Integrity and HP Proliant servers with some HP specific programs added to the Debian install. Which most likely means it will not be cheap and cheerful but expensive and serious (as 24x7 support is when it works)
And I would also say that HP seems to have way more than a fleeting interest in Debian. Debian IS their internal development platform company wide and has been since about 2002. They had to pick one distro because there were to many different ones used all over the company. So it's just not just "those guys" that have linux experience, those are only the visible to the outside.
And HP also runs QA testing on servers to make sure they actually work as well.
Only time will tell I guess but they do have the know-how in the company... since Debian is used as an internal development platform for Linux and they also host one full primary mirror site.
HP also has a handful of employees that are Debian developers.
Source:http://opensource.hp.com/opensource_projec
Or if they take beta blockers which dampens the physical symptoms of panic/anxiety (heartrate, bloodpressure, sweating etc).
How high do they transmit?
Not an expert but I belive most antennas aren't transmitting in a spherical pattern since that would be a waste of radio energy since you're much more likely to have a connection far away on the horisontal plane than on the vertical one. Some APs also have turnable antennas which would make little sense if it was a spherical radiation pattern.
As for being dangerous to flying over planes?
Don't think so. Then a malfuctioning microwave oven would be a lot more of an hazard to flights (same frequency range if we're talking about 11b/g). And remember that radiation diminishes with the square of the distance from the antenna.
Except that the courts aren't quite as Perry Masonesque as you seem to think they are. IBM would have gotten about the same time to ponder the allegations if the case had proceded according to schedule instead of being postponed ad nausem. So that argument doesn't hold much water. Actually, by delaying SCOX has give IBM even MORE time to get its ducks in a row.
And a lot of SCOX claims have already been thrown out because of lacking specificity. Seems their "trump card" coming along to well. To quote Judge Wells: And this was after SCOX had submitted their experts report on the infringement.
Except that The SCO Group (SCOX) isn't that company. It's the company that used to be know as Caldera who bought the UNIX business from OldSCO. From what I've gathered they wanted to use the huge amounts of VARs that used SCO UNIX and push Caldera as the OS of choice instead. Apparently that didn't pan out as planned (maybe because many of the VARs were rather small and couldn't change course without significant costs).
Then comes plan B into play: who can we sue?
A smaller company sues a larger one. The larger company spends so much on lawyers that it drains the resources of the smaller company, crippling the company until they can't fight any more
Except that in THIS case it's the smaller company that's been dragging it's feet at EVERY step of the way. So IBM hasn't done "something like this".
Yes, it's truly rediculous....
To quote Janis Ian:
And she goes on to state her opinion on the downloads as:
Source: http://www.janisian.com/article-internet_debacle.
All things considered, it is good to have a tour-winner again who is not specializing in this event and does other courses too, unlike the specialist Lance Armstrong. The fact that he only competed in the Tour took the shine off his victories. It seems fairer this way.
Armstrong was a truly great cyclist. But I'll agree that him being a one trick pony when it came to races places him under people like Miguel Indurain. I've talked with people who have admired his multi-win streak and when I've said "Yeah, he's good but I think Indurain was better" and have them go "Indu-who?"
For those that don't know. Indurain won 5 consecutive Tour de France races 91-95 and Giro d'Italia 92-93 (not that many double winners in the history). He also set a World Hour Record in 94.
rather thought that the destiny of the initial cells was known out to about a month- perhaps I'm confusing humans and C. elegans, which i am certain has been fully documented. I'm a tad bit tipsy at the moment- perhaps this tequila worm could tell me, if it weren't pickeled...
When your blood alcohol comes down you'll probably realise that you're not going to find much likeness regarding brain development between humans and C. Elegans. Because they don't have much of a brain... in fact they're lacking circulatory and respiratory systems as well.
More of a high end performance test.
There was one proper torture test done by the UK Digital Camera Shopper magazine where they dipped in cola, run through a washing machine, dunked in coffee, trampled and then for sport hit with a sledgehammer and then nailed to a tree. They didn't survive the last two tests though...
Wonderfully resilient stuff I'd say.
Couldn't find the article freely availabe on the mag, just a ref at BBC news: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3939333.stm
Yes because I'm sure this will be the only growth Google sees in the next 166 years.
Totally agree with you there that Google will continue to grow.
Acutally I don't see no reason why Google shoulde become as big as Microsoft (no, just as big, not the NEXT Microsoft), Currently Google has the a revenue that's about 1/6 of Microsofts and a market value that's roughly half. Profit margin looks good as well even if it's 3/4 of Microsoft. On the other hand O think Google stands a better chance of continued expansion and renewal than Microsoft which has had a bad trackrecord (financially) with trying to expand into new areas after pretty much saturating the desktop niche and facing stiffer competition on servers.
Will Googles stock rise even higher though? Don't think so.
Am I alone in not being attracted by all these bells and whistles phones have these days? I want a phone to be a phone - I already have a digital camera to take pictures, and a music player to play music. Why try to cram all these features into a mobile phone, which just complicates the user interface and adds cost?
No, you're not alone but you're relativly marginal in low margin segment.
Compare with computers or cars that only really basic features, like a computer with no frills at all or low end asian econo-box cars. They don't sell that well since they don't cost THAT much less. With a low-end product you need to sell a lot to recoupe your investment since per item return is low along with the fact that it's easier for other companies to jump on the bandwagon should it start rolling. And then you would have every Tom, Dick and Harry eating at the table you set.
And them, of course cellphone operators only offer subsidizes phones that are likely to increase the use of their services. I guess the way to go for people like you is cash cards and buy your own basic phone. You're just not profitable as a group to, in the eyes of the operators, to justify a subsidizes phone.
Cash transfer. As I've mentioned before they paid the anti-competition fine (497 million euro) and are now appealing that. This fine is for non-compliance which they will of course appeal as well. But I guess they will pay it.