I don't know if Shaun really planned it or not, but it seemed pretty clear from this article that they were pretty aware of its primary usage. To quote the article quoting one of their VC's, Jason Grofield:
"They were not in reality closing their eyes to the copyright infringement going on there - they bragged about it," Grosfeld says. "My lawyer thought it was insane."
While nobody believes that investors have responsibility for things like the Exxon Valdez, isn't it different (or shouldn't it be different) if you knowingly fund criminal activity?
It's not that I'm longing for applications to use text configuration files as their own internal/runtime format. It's the ability to import and export the configuration via text files that I find so appealing. I don't especially care if, after importing a configuration, the application stores it in the registry or a metabase or whatever. I just like being able to export the configuration and review it in its entirety in human-readable form.
The configuration files in IIS 6 are XML documents, which are reasonably easy to view and modify. The files can be stored anywhere, unlike the old backup files which had to be in a particular directory in order to be used. The files also seem more robust -- the old-style backup files didn't always import into a clean install correctly, but I haven't had any problems with importing the new files.
Multiple sites can be stored in a single file, which is pretty handy. I was only able to import one site at a time though, which makes re-loading the server a bit painful if you have multiple sites on the same server.
Being text based makes it much easier to review configurations for errors and allows me to now use Perforce to track my changes with simple diffs. I wish more software used text based configuration files!
If only we had these little converters on everybody's keyboards, then all the messages protesting the poor quality of this post could power Slashdot's servers until the next ill-conceived post comes along.
Why so much bashing about 1080i and whether or not that is worth it on a 19" monitor? Everyone seems to be forgetting that there are other resolutions which will benefit, and that the whole thing is still digital TV, which is far better looking than off-air or even digital cable. Even 1080i looks great scaled to fit a 1280x1024 monitor (my DILA projector does exactly that). Other than the price (which shouldn't be more than $200 really), I think this box has a place as a low-end digital TV receiver.
What smoking gun? What corpse? All I see so far is a failed business deal and a company who initially claimed one reason ("no source code access") now claiming another ("they gave away our secrets"). This whole thing smells funny to me, but it's neither from rotting corpses nor what's in my pipe.
Not to be too quick to defend Microsoft (certainly not on/.), but the article didn't actually given any details on Sendo's complaint. What is it that Microsoft has "stolen" from them? For all we know right now, it's something stupidly obvious like "a method for simulating pushbuttons on an LCD" or "pressing talk without entering a number automatically redials the last number called". There's probably more to it than this, but all these posts are so quick to assume Microsoft's guilt without having any substantial information other than the fact that a suit has been filed. If I were Sendo, I'd probably claim Microsoft was oppressing me too -- hell, everyone assumes it anyhow so what's there to lose? Even the article's quote about the case "having merit" came from Sendo themselves. Well of course *they're* going to say that! I'd be much more impressed if somebody independent said the same thing.
Yeah, Microsoft's business practices are shady at best, but we don't have any substantial information about Sendo's claims at all right now, so it seems foolish to forming opinions so prematurely.
I agree - I too built one of these last year and was a bit disappointed in it. Outdoors, any sort of breeze at all screwed up the effect and indoors the movement of party guests whipped it up and a room filled with oil-fog isn't very much fun at all. I haven't tried putting dry ice in the tube in order to make the fog colder and therefore heavier. This year I'm mostly hoping that the air on Halloween will be much calmer so I can just fill my front yard with creepiness. I suppose I should hope for warmer weather as well, since that should make the chilled fog cling to the ground better too. These things only take a couple of hours to build once you have everything, but don't get your hopes up too high for Vincent Price-quality English moor effect or anything.
I'm always suprised when somebody tries to judge what is or isn't art. Can't art just be whatever somebody wants to call "art"? No, a cellphone concert is not particularly deep, nor is it likely to change civilization. I think it's great simply because it happened -- it's bizarre to have even considered doing it in the first place, and then to actually have it work and sound interesting is icing on the cake. Don't look too deep in order to decide if something is art. Just appreciate the fact that it exists, even when it annoys the hell out of you.
Aside from the Trustworthy Computing crap, what does this really say about the industry-wide practice of outsourcing product translations? Anybody who's done software development knows that even the best products give internationalization secondary consideration, but I don't think anybody ever considered how little consideration is given by US companies to the translation and distribution of international versions of software. Perhaps this should serve as a sort of larger wake-up call for all of us.
It seems to me that the biggest problem with Microsoft is that it can use Windows as a bargaining chip to muscle into markets (or muscle others out of them). Instead of breaking up the company or creating complex regulation with ill-defined statements about how Windows can be developed, why not simply take away the ability to use Windows as a weapon?
Simply put, force Microsoft to use standard, publicized pricing and force them to sell Windows to anyone who wants to buy it. No cutting special pricing deals. No denying Windows to a manufacturer. Microsoft can set the bulk pricing rates but they have to charge everybody the same rates for the same quantities.
This seems like it would be easy to legally describe, it would be simple to enforce, and it would take away the ability for Microsoft to use Windows as a weapon. It wouldn't stop them from adding features to Windows, but I don't think that's desirable or necessary to achieve the major goals of this lawsuit.
Slashdot Mirror
Slip slidin' away
Slip slidin' away
You know the nearer your destination
The more you're slip slidin' away
It's not that I'm longing for applications to use text configuration files as their own internal/runtime format. It's the ability to import and export the configuration via text files that I find so appealing. I don't especially care if, after importing a configuration, the application stores it in the registry or a metabase or whatever. I just like being able to export the configuration and review it in its entirety in human-readable form.
The configuration files in IIS 6 are XML documents, which are reasonably easy to view and modify. The files can be stored anywhere, unlike the old backup files which had to be in a particular directory in order to be used. The files also seem more robust -- the old-style backup files didn't always import into a clean install correctly, but I haven't had any problems with importing the new files.
Multiple sites can be stored in a single file, which is pretty handy. I was only able to import one site at a time though, which makes re-loading the server a bit painful if you have multiple sites on the same server.
Being text based makes it much easier to review configurations for errors and allows me to now use Perforce to track my changes with simple diffs. I wish more software used text based configuration files!
If only we had these little converters on everybody's keyboards, then all the messages protesting the poor quality of this post could power Slashdot's servers until the next ill-conceived post comes along.
Why so much bashing about 1080i and whether or not that is worth it on a 19" monitor? Everyone seems to be forgetting that there are other resolutions which will benefit, and that the whole thing is still digital TV, which is far better looking than off-air or even digital cable. Even 1080i looks great scaled to fit a 1280x1024 monitor (my DILA projector does exactly that). Other than the price (which shouldn't be more than $200 really), I think this box has a place as a low-end digital TV receiver.
What smoking gun? What corpse? All I see so far is a failed business deal and a company who initially claimed one reason ("no source code access") now claiming another ("they gave away our secrets"). This whole thing smells funny to me, but it's neither from rotting corpses nor what's in my pipe.
Not to be too quick to defend Microsoft (certainly not on /.), but the article didn't actually given any details on Sendo's complaint. What is it that Microsoft has "stolen" from them? For all we know right now, it's something stupidly obvious like "a method for simulating pushbuttons on an LCD" or "pressing talk without entering a number automatically redials the last number called". There's probably more to it than this, but all these posts are so quick to assume Microsoft's guilt without having any substantial information other than the fact that a suit has been filed. If I were Sendo, I'd probably claim Microsoft was oppressing me too -- hell, everyone assumes it anyhow so what's there to lose? Even the article's quote about the case "having merit" came from Sendo themselves. Well of course *they're* going to say that! I'd be much more impressed if somebody independent said the same thing.
Yeah, Microsoft's business practices are shady at best, but we don't have any substantial information about Sendo's claims at all right now, so it seems foolish to forming opinions so prematurely.
I agree - I too built one of these last year and was a bit disappointed in it. Outdoors, any sort of breeze at all screwed up the effect and indoors the movement of party guests whipped it up and a room filled with oil-fog isn't very much fun at all. I haven't tried putting dry ice in the tube in order to make the fog colder and therefore heavier. This year I'm mostly hoping that the air on Halloween will be much calmer so I can just fill my front yard with creepiness. I suppose I should hope for warmer weather as well, since that should make the chilled fog cling to the ground better too. These things only take a couple of hours to build once you have everything, but don't get your hopes up too high for Vincent Price-quality English moor effect or anything.
I'm always suprised when somebody tries to judge what is or isn't art. Can't art just be whatever somebody wants to call "art"? No, a cellphone concert is not particularly deep, nor is it likely to change civilization. I think it's great simply because it happened -- it's bizarre to have even considered doing it in the first place, and then to actually have it work and sound interesting is icing on the cake. Don't look too deep in order to decide if something is art. Just appreciate the fact that it exists, even when it annoys the hell out of you.
Aside from the Trustworthy Computing crap, what does this really say about the industry-wide practice of outsourcing product translations? Anybody who's done software development knows that even the best products give internationalization secondary consideration, but I don't think anybody ever considered how little consideration is given by US companies to the translation and distribution of international versions of software. Perhaps this should serve as a sort of larger wake-up call for all of us.
It seems to me that the biggest problem with Microsoft is that it can use Windows as a bargaining chip to muscle into markets (or muscle others out of them). Instead of breaking up the company or creating complex regulation with ill-defined statements about how Windows can be developed, why not simply take away the ability to use Windows as a weapon?
Simply put, force Microsoft to use standard, publicized pricing and force them to sell Windows to anyone who wants to buy it. No cutting special pricing deals. No denying Windows to a manufacturer. Microsoft can set the bulk pricing rates but they have to charge everybody the same rates for the same quantities.
This seems like it would be easy to legally describe, it would be simple to enforce, and it would take away the ability for Microsoft to use Windows as a weapon. It wouldn't stop them from adding features to Windows, but I don't think that's desirable or necessary to achieve the major goals of this lawsuit.