Microsoft was one of the first (maybe the first?) company of that era who grew HUGE and simply refused to pay dividends to stockholders. The company grew so well, and shareholder value grew so well, that it worked out ok for everyone, making many a millionaire out of many a stockholder. But the fiscal conservative part is true and interesting. They hoarded cash and they didn't (until recently) spend it on acquisitions. Instead they more or less bullied their way to higher market share, with plenty of cash to pay plenty of lawyers as they went along.
So the Chinese are saying today that the original story, in the Shanghai Securities News wasn't true. I'm not sure I believe the news report or the government. Does the Chinese government care about creating an open, free economy? It might want to start by weeding out all the counterfeiting going on under its nose. But, it's a little distracted too busy censoring the Internet...
Maybe this is the last straw... I think I'll officially become an anarchist (can a person do that "officially"? Or would the act of doing it officially mean that you were applying governance/rules to it...) In any case, let's just abolish the government altogether. We won't need to put our so-called leaders in jail, there won't be any jails.
"But once the data is set free, all kinds of Web 1.0, Web 2.0 and Web 3.0 apps are possible."
Newsflash... it's not a bright idea to load up any of these online cloud databases with your personal medical records... I mean, why the heck would I want to blab to Google (and hence, eventually the world) that I'm a herpes-infested schizophrenic... no, you're not... yes, I am... no way!... I told you to stop bothering me while I'm typing...
Not sure if I've got all the history right, but if I do, I can see why this would be a highlight for dear old Bill. Windows 95 at first shipped without IE, then included it and by 1998, Bill was embroiled in a nice stressful antitrust case with the DOJ. So Windows 95 represents the height of his power-grabbing, smash-the-competition days. Also, Windows 95 was the first time Bill became cool -- remember the Rolling Stones singing "Start me up" over the start button? They were high in those days, for sure -- high and mighty.
Agree completely... if they want to pay for someone to do nothing, that is their choice. But there must be better things to do than Watching Grass Grow or Paint Dry... doesn't everybody have an unfinished novel waiting for attention? It's the perfect time for that. You can be typing away looking busy and productive -- no questions asked.
So Google now stores your medical records -- the only reason Google did this was because it was the one online service that Microsoft managed to get out the door first -- Microsoft's HealthVault launched in October. (Of course, Microsoft copied WebMD and Revolution Health on the idea).
So if Microsoft copies everything that Google does and Google copies whatever Microsoft does, do we wind up with two identical evil empires?
Violence aside, raising a dog takes almost as much energy as raising a child, if you want to do it well. Even a well trained dog is only as independent as a 3-4 year old. If you want to have a dog, you might as well have a child.
Almost as much energy?... Puppy to full grown dog, one year. Puppy to mellow, nicely behaved member of the family, two years...
Baby to mellow, nicely behaved member of the family... what, maybe 30 years?
Seems like an awful lot of trouble to help people avoid something they do easily and naturally -- walking. I mean, maybe it's great for people stuck in prison... or those who can't walk for physical reasons. But I, personally, like to be outside. I don't need VR to mimic reality all that much because I actually HAVE reality around when I want to be part of it. When I go into VR, I'd rather fly or swim or use my superpowers.
I agree with you 100%. Microsoft wants to own everything which isn't good for anyone. But I don't think the average Internet user will care that Microsoft owns Silverlight. I'm thinking of my non-techie friends who enjoy their MySpace pages, but don't have much interest in the industry side of things. If they go to a Website that says "you must download Silverlight to view" they will probably download it, just like we all did with Flash and other add-ins. Microsoft doesn't need buy-in from Web developers to gain users. Once they have the users, the Web developers will follow 'cause that's the way the world works.
At the time these people were buying the computers the average customer couldn't have known about the performance issues Vista would have. The labeling was clearly misleading. It had one intention only, to assure people that it was ok to buy the machine now and then it would be ready for "Vista" when that was available. At the time they were slapping those labels on the machines, Microsoft executives certainly must have known that this was hardly the truth.
Yes, seems like there is no reason a technical solution couldn't solve the problem of balancing privacy with data sharing. There is still plenty to be learned if the data sharing were general enough. If researchers knew my age, sex, weight -- do they really need to know my name and address? At the same time, the irony is that if we all released every single detail about ourselves to researchers, the world would be fine -- it's not the researchers that are the bad guys. It is the storing of the data somewhere where the bad guys can break in and get it. Really, the grocery store knows as much about me as anyone -- sharing my grocery habits (which includes my zipcode info) with food researchers isn't the problem. Someone can hack into the store's database, no researcher required.
"Microsoft probably anticipated that school districts would mainly use the settlement to buy more Microsoft products, with a few Apple purchases sprinkled in here and there."
That's a pretty big "who cares" isn't it? Whatever Microsoft thought the fine would be used for doesn't make a bean of difference. The true irony would have been if the money WAS really being used to buy mostly Microsoft products. Then you'd have bamboozled consumers paying --> microsoft paying --> government fines paying --> schools paying --> microsoft... end result Microsoft has the money. But that's not the case so it's all cool.
Give him the virtual thumbs-up (or thumbs-down... or a display of other assorted fingers?) in this text chat on Monday. Werner Vogels, Amazon.com, CTO will be doing a live chat, open to all on Monday, October 1, 2 p.m. eastern.
Or maybe you can tell him what you think of their new Website in general. They are asking for comments.
Yes, of course it will hold up in court. If they could have found a way to null the Microsoft/Novell deal they would have done it. Not sure it's really necessary anyway. The Microsoft Subnet blog points out that ultimately the market will decide who wins. Dekstop virtualization technologies and things like Google apps will make all of this a who-cares five years from now anyway, least from an OS perspective. The desktop will be some version of something running on some version of something else and we'll all be logged onto the Internet to be writing documents.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft was one of the first (maybe the first?) company of that era who grew HUGE and simply refused to pay dividends to stockholders. The company grew so well, and shareholder value grew so well, that it worked out ok for everyone, making many a millionaire out of many a stockholder. But the fiscal conservative part is true and interesting. They hoarded cash and they didn't (until recently) spend it on acquisitions. Instead they more or less bullied their way to higher market share, with plenty of cash to pay plenty of lawyers as they went along.
So the Chinese are saying today that the original story, in the Shanghai Securities News wasn't true. I'm not sure I believe the news report or the government. Does the Chinese government care about creating an open, free economy? It might want to start by weeding out all the counterfeiting going on under its nose. But, it's a little distracted too busy censoring the Internet ...
Maybe this is the last straw ... I think I'll officially become an anarchist (can a person do that "officially"? Or would the act of doing it officially mean that you were applying governance/rules to it ...) In any case, let's just abolish the government altogether. We won't need to put our so-called leaders in jail, there won't be any jails.
"But once the data is set free, all kinds of Web 1.0, Web 2.0 and Web 3.0 apps are possible." Newsflash ... it's not a bright idea to load up any of these online cloud databases with your personal medical records ... I mean, why the heck would I want to blab to Google (and hence, eventually the world) that I'm a herpes-infested schizophrenic ... no, you're not ... yes, I am ... no way! ... I told you to stop bothering me while I'm typing ...
Not sure if I've got all the history right, but if I do, I can see why this would be a highlight for dear old Bill. Windows 95 at first shipped without IE, then included it and by 1998, Bill was embroiled in a nice stressful antitrust case with the DOJ. So Windows 95 represents the height of his power-grabbing, smash-the-competition days. Also, Windows 95 was the first time Bill became cool -- remember the Rolling Stones singing "Start me up" over the start button? They were high in those days, for sure -- high and mighty.
Agree completely ... if they want to pay for someone to do nothing, that is their choice. But there must be better things to do than Watching Grass Grow or Paint Dry ... doesn't everybody have an unfinished novel waiting for attention? It's the perfect time for that. You can be typing away looking busy and productive -- no questions asked.
So Google now stores your medical records -- the only reason Google did this was because it was the one online service that Microsoft managed to get out the door first -- Microsoft's HealthVault launched in October. (Of course, Microsoft copied WebMD and Revolution Health on the idea). So if Microsoft copies everything that Google does and Google copies whatever Microsoft does, do we wind up with two identical evil empires?
Violence aside, raising a dog takes almost as much energy as raising a child, if you want to do it well. Even a well trained dog is only as independent as a 3-4 year old. If you want to have a dog, you might as well have a child.
Almost as much energy?Seems like an awful lot of trouble to help people avoid something they do easily and naturally -- walking. I mean, maybe it's great for people stuck in prison ... or those who can't walk for physical reasons. But I, personally, like to be outside. I don't need VR to mimic reality all that much because I actually HAVE reality around when I want to be part of it. When I go into VR, I'd rather fly or swim or use my superpowers.
Julie
--
Microsoft Subnet: the independent voice of Microsoft customers
--
Microsoft Subnet: the independent voice of Microsoft customers
Microsoft Subnet: the independent voice of Microsoft customers
-- Julie
Microsoft Subnet: the independent voice of Microsoft customers
-- Julie
Microsoft Subnet: the independent voice of Microsoft customers
The second URL was a good giveaway. Wonder if the average e-mail user could do that. to teach Internet users about the dangers of phishing. Kind of fun and interesting.
Give him the virtual thumbs-up (or thumbs-down ... or a display of other assorted fingers?) in this text chat on Monday. Werner Vogels, Amazon.com, CTO will be doing a live chat, open to all on Monday, October 1, 2 p.m. eastern.
Or maybe you can tell him what you think of their new Website in general. They are asking for comments.
Here's a story also that adds that Google is talking about investing in Facebook. Makes it sound like Microsoft's move is just another way to get back at Google. (Did you know Microsoft has started a "consortium" to try and block the Google/Doubleclick merger -- only no other companies will join so far?) Another tug-o-war between the two and Facebook developers wind up rich? The reports sound like nothing more than rumors, even if they do come from the WSJ.
--
Microsoft Subnet -- the independent voice
Yes, of course it will hold up in court. If they could have found a way to null the Microsoft/Novell deal they would have done it. Not sure it's really necessary anyway. The Microsoft Subnet blog points out that ultimately the market will decide who wins. Dekstop virtualization technologies and things like Google apps will make all of this a who-cares five years from now anyway, least from an OS perspective. The desktop will be some version of something running on some version of something else and we'll all be logged onto the Internet to be writing documents.