Huh? What point are you trying to make about SkyHook?
Yes - the SSID and strength database was important to Google, and - yes - it did collect that data deliberately. I'm sure lots of Google managers and engineers were familiar with this and had approved it.
I'm not sure whether the agreed transition of Java support for Mac OS X from Apple to Oracle has happened. Apple still supplies it but do we know who does the maintenance?
Regardless of that, the plain fact is that Mac OS X 10.7 Lion does NOT install Java by default. Anyone who wants it can get it, but it's not present unless the user specifically installs it.
AT&T seem to have no moral core. No honesty. No "do the right thing"
This is the way their wireless systems operate, and I'm not surprised to find it in their other operations.
If corporations have rights as "persons" to make political contributions (as they do sine the "Citizens United" case") then why can't they go to jail when they break the law?
This is almost certainly legal if the parents are paying for the phone. After all, it's just tracking their own phone. SInce it seems to be restricted to phones on the "Family Share Plan" then I'd guess that the parents are paying for it all.
If the kids are paying then that's a whole different issue.
The significant thing in OP is that the FACTS cannot be reexamined.
The decision can be appealed on the basis of law such as that the judge misapplied the statutes, inappropriately excluded evidence, etc. But the jury's decision as regards to the facts can not be appealed - it is final.
I just want decent pricing and non-gouging on the phones.
There is no valid reason why AT&T can keep phones locked after the contract/subsidy term is up. I had expected that this would change when Verizon became the second carrier. Unfortunately not. I *will* not buy another from AT&T since they refuse to unlock.
Look, other companies don't adopt Apple's $499 price point because they want to, it's because they can't price higher.
And they can't price lower because their margin on hardware competitive with Apple is close to zero. Apple is killing them on production cost.
If Samsung or HP were able to make an iPad-competitive tablet and sell it for $249 and make a decent profit, do you think that they just got greedy by holding out for $499 ??
So get it through your thick skulls:-
1. Apple has set the tablet specs, in a general way
2. competitors have to have a better product, rather than "just as good"
It may have "cost" RSA $66M in direct cost. But is has cost their customers a whole lot more. Many are places that don't officially exist so there aren't going to be claims, are there.
In terms of overall business, my uneducated guess is that it will cost north of $1B. Trust is hard-won and easily squandered. Sorry guys :)
Longhorn, Cairo etc etc. Microsoft has a history of reaching for it all. Have never delivered on it yet.
So, tell me why it will be different this time. Don't spend time pointing out all the gleam and shine - we've had it all before. Instead, make a convincing argument for excellence of execution.
Problem is that Microsoft does not understand what business it is in.
You open a whole pile of stores, as Apple has done, because ...
1. you have compelling products that people want to buy, and
2. you're not getting acces to those people.
Microsoft sells primarily to companies, not individual consumers. They're selling we-can-do-it-all infrastructure stuff and Volume Licensing.
Stores in malls are about selling product directly to individuals. To make that work you must have compelling products that those individuals want to touch, try and buy. Sad to say, Microsoft's track record here varies between abysmal and OK. The only "OK" I can recall is Xbox (no flames please - I'm not a gamer) but it seems to have done decently despite the RRoD problems. Kinect is interesting also but I see that as an accessory rather than a product, so I'm not counting it here. For abysmal, the list includes Kin; for bad it's probably Zune.
For Microsoft to open more stores will ...
1. cost a bunch of money
2. expose just how weak their product portfolio really is
Microsoft is trying to generate "Apple buzz" by mimicking Apple's stores. It doesn't work that way. There has to be something that people want to buzz about, and Microsoft just doesn't have it. I'm not sure it ever will but it certainly doesn't look like "soon".
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. But Rule #1 of imitation is that you have to do it better than the original (or at least as well in some circumstances). That won't happen here.
I think that Microsoft's Board or Directors has taken leave of its senses. There's no strategy to follow the success of the Win/Office franchise and they have Steve Ballmer in place to execute. Bad plan, folks. Bad plan.
Oracle has access to the full content of all these documents so their only reason to push for disclosure is to move the trial from the Court to the public forum.
I have no idea what in the blackey-bits but lets be clear about why Oracle want to wave them about.
The rules will stay for a little while and then Murdoch will change them. He's already admitted that he lied with respect to commitments made during earlier takeovers. Why should this time be different?
This is just a Gov't FAIL - pure and simple. They know who they're dealing with and it's no use pretending otherwise.
In the technology frenzy of today, your leading product will be eaten up before long. Your only decision is whether you will do it with a superior product (possibly disruptive, and lower financial returns) or some competitor will do it (probably disruptive, probably lower financial returns).
This is Microsoft's dilemma. So far it appears that they're hedging their bets on the old scheme. Bad news guys - that won't work. I've lived through a couple of these and in every case they failed. Of course, the PHBs responsible had gone with their bonuses by the time of the implosion (not all that long, actually).
contemplate "cloud" and "tablet" and you'll have a start.
It's not so much that WIndows might be displaced on PCs, although some of that will happen. It's more that Windows PCs are no longer at the center of users' experiences.
When the lock on the "clients" goes away, as it is now doing, then Microsoft's lock on the server-client interaction is worth much less than it previously was. You can't automatically sell Windows Server 20xx because it's the only thing that integrates "fully" with Windows "n" (n being some number such as 7, 8 etc).
Those heady days are gone. Steve Ballmer just hasn't realized it yet.
"The data raises the obvious question: If automatically retiring Autorun reaped such clear benefits, why didn't Microsoft do it years ago?"
Because there was NO ADVANTAGE TO MICROSOFT for doing it.
It seems that now there is, what with its previously-unassailable OS dominance under threat from various groups that no longer accept the prevalence of zero-day attacks.
it seems to me that there are several reasons for the sequence so far. Obviously, removing surface-to-air capability is crucial, and severing command-and-control links is high up on the list.
Taking out an armoured column clearly removes that as a threat but also says "who's next" to the mercenaries. They're not part of the tribes and peeling them off is essential so that the Libyans can solve their own problem. Given the results of the past day or so, I would expect that many will be heading out very soon.
Without getting too deep into the religious aspect of things, "Happy Birthday" is not entirely inappropriate for a Christmas card. In fact, some folks would think it very good.
Register
196 posts • joined Thursday 25th June 2009 18:57 GMT
Page:
actually, no.
"That's an amazingly fast shift, and it says a great deal about how open source drives innovation."
Actually, no. It says a great deal about how Oracle ownership drives open-source innovation.
"Windows"
Microsoft could have avoided all this if tablet OS was named something other than "Windows".
But that would not do for Redmond, would it?
or ...
better - "circling the rim"
Huh ?
Huh? What point are you trying to make about SkyHook?
Yes - the SSID and strength database was important to Google, and - yes - it did collect that data deliberately. I'm sure lots of Google managers and engineers were familiar with this and had approved it.
That is NOT the same as the "private data slurp".
not installed by default
I'm not sure whether the agreed transition of Java support for Mac OS X from Apple to Oracle has happened. Apple still supplies it but do we know who does the maintenance?
Regardless of that, the plain fact is that Mac OS X 10.7 Lion does NOT install Java by default. Anyone who wants it can get it, but it's not present unless the user specifically installs it.
prior art
I think that the HPs actions here have a non-trivial resemblance to the cost-cutting scheme at Circuit City.
And we all know where that led.
pity
Pity that is almost directly in line with the runways at Dulles Airport.
Any way the wind blows money
AT&T seem to have no moral core. No honesty. No "do the right thing"
This is the way their wireless systems operate, and I'm not surprised to find it in their other operations.
If corporations have rights as "persons" to make political contributions (as they do sine the "Citizens United" case") then why can't they go to jail when they break the law?
almost certainly legal
This is almost certainly legal if the parents are paying for the phone. After all, it's just tracking their own phone. SInce it seems to be restricted to phones on the "Family Share Plan" then I'd guess that the parents are paying for it all.
If the kids are paying then that's a whole different issue.
Just the facts ...
The significant thing in OP is that the FACTS cannot be reexamined.
The decision can be appealed on the basis of law such as that the judge misapplied the statutes, inappropriately excluded evidence, etc. But the jury's decision as regards to the facts can not be appealed - it is final.
dumb
I think the appropriate term for Samsung's activity is
"own goal"
No wonder
>Why use Ubuntu when you can grab a copy of Windows of a download site?
No wonder you posted that as AC
oh dear
It seems that Apple's profit is more than Google's revenue.
Oh. Dear. Android.
well deserved
If they have been relying upon secrecy of the source code for protection then that's just security-by-obscurity.
That has never been good security policy, and they deserve all the beating they get.
business as usual
This has all the taste of doing stuff in the kernel that properly belongs in user-space.
Windows has been doing this since forever, and I guess it isn't going to stop. It's not a coding issue, but one of system architecture.
upgrade
T-M is supposed to get some spectrum as part of the breakup fee.
I hope it's in ranges that are the iPhone supports. Then I'll think seriously about dumping AT&T
decent pricing
I just want decent pricing and non-gouging on the phones.
There is no valid reason why AT&T can keep phones locked after the contract/subsidy term is up. I had expected that this would change when Verizon became the second carrier. Unfortunately not. I *will* not buy another from AT&T since they refuse to unlock.
Time of secure storage
Alex, if the Romans used uranium as we have done then we'd still have many tens/hundreds of thousands of years to go.
On the other hand, if they used thorium then it would have been safe well before the time of King Arthur.
The Chinese are moving quickly into nuclear power and it's no surprise to me that they've selected thorium for fuel.
duh, stupid
Of course 99% of the attacks are old ones. Zombies run forever, y'know
The 1% are the ones that will kill you. 'Cos those are the ones that no-one has seen (except MS when they created them)
author FAIL
Look, other companies don't adopt Apple's $499 price point because they want to, it's because they can't price higher.
And they can't price lower because their margin on hardware competitive with Apple is close to zero. Apple is killing them on production cost.
If Samsung or HP were able to make an iPad-competitive tablet and sell it for $249 and make a decent profit, do you think that they just got greedy by holding out for $499 ??
So get it through your thick skulls:-
1. Apple has set the tablet specs, in a general way
2. competitors have to have a better product, rather than "just as good"
3. Apple can build 'em cheaper than everyone else
OS X
It's true that user-space programming for OS X is typically done using Objective-C.
Have a look into the kernel and you'll find lots of C++, as well as C (BSD origins, after all). The driver model presumes C++.
charge for filing too
There has to be a charge for Mr Record Exec to file complaints. He gets it back if the complaint is upheld.
If you have to put up twenty quid to appeal, how come he gets to file for free??
hhmmm
Almost makes me want to keep pliers and a couple of elastrator bands handy.
bogus
It may have "cost" RSA $66M in direct cost. But is has cost their customers a whole lot more. Many are places that don't officially exist so there aren't going to be claims, are there.
In terms of overall business, my uneducated guess is that it will cost north of $1B. Trust is hard-won and easily squandered. Sorry guys :)
optical drives
Er - they've ALL lost the optical drive. Not just the server model (which lost it some time ago).
No optical drive on ANY Mini.
strategy
Longhorn, Cairo etc etc. Microsoft has a history of reaching for it all. Have never delivered on it yet.
So, tell me why it will be different this time. Don't spend time pointing out all the gleam and shine - we've had it all before. Instead, make a convincing argument for excellence of execution.
Problem is ...
Problem is that Microsoft does not understand what business it is in.
You open a whole pile of stores, as Apple has done, because ...
1. you have compelling products that people want to buy, and
2. you're not getting acces to those people.
Microsoft sells primarily to companies, not individual consumers. They're selling we-can-do-it-all infrastructure stuff and Volume Licensing.
Stores in malls are about selling product directly to individuals. To make that work you must have compelling products that those individuals want to touch, try and buy. Sad to say, Microsoft's track record here varies between abysmal and OK. The only "OK" I can recall is Xbox (no flames please - I'm not a gamer) but it seems to have done decently despite the RRoD problems. Kinect is interesting also but I see that as an accessory rather than a product, so I'm not counting it here. For abysmal, the list includes Kin; for bad it's probably Zune.
For Microsoft to open more stores will ...
1. cost a bunch of money
2. expose just how weak their product portfolio really is
Microsoft is trying to generate "Apple buzz" by mimicking Apple's stores. It doesn't work that way. There has to be something that people want to buzz about, and Microsoft just doesn't have it. I'm not sure it ever will but it certainly doesn't look like "soon".
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. But Rule #1 of imitation is that you have to do it better than the original (or at least as well in some circumstances). That won't happen here.
I think that Microsoft's Board or Directors has taken leave of its senses. There's no strategy to follow the success of the Win/Office franchise and they have Steve Ballmer in place to execute. Bad plan, folks. Bad plan.
who knew?
Who knew ??
Anyone who read the contract, that's who.
Next question ...
which Court
Oracle has access to the full content of all these documents so their only reason to push for disclosure is to move the trial from the Court to the public forum.
I have no idea what in the blackey-bits but lets be clear about why Oracle want to wave them about.
another chair
Just movin' the deckchairs.
Noting of significance will change until Ballmer is gone.
I understand that Bill is his friend, and also Chairman of the Board. But, seriously, some people on the Board have some common sense. Don't they?
I guess not. Pity :(
title
Damn the icebergs -- full speed ahead !!
Useless
The rules will stay for a little while and then Murdoch will change them. He's already admitted that he lied with respect to commitments made during earlier takeovers. Why should this time be different?
This is just a Gov't FAIL - pure and simple. They know who they're dealing with and it's no use pretending otherwise.
Titanic
Seems that the only exec unaffected by the blood-letting is the one who deserves it most.
Beatings will continue until morale improves.
That means you, Steve.
MS - they don't get it
In the technology frenzy of today, your leading product will be eaten up before long. Your only decision is whether you will do it with a superior product (possibly disruptive, and lower financial returns) or some competitor will do it (probably disruptive, probably lower financial returns).
This is Microsoft's dilemma. So far it appears that they're hedging their bets on the old scheme. Bad news guys - that won't work. I've lived through a couple of these and in every case they failed. Of course, the PHBs responsible had gone with their bonuses by the time of the implosion (not all that long, actually).
DNS root servers
There are thirteen and the U.S. controls about half of them now. Not all are physically located in the U.S.
What you're really talking about are servers for places like .com and .net -- these are indeed under U.S. control
paradigm shift
contemplate "cloud" and "tablet" and you'll have a start.
It's not so much that WIndows might be displaced on PCs, although some of that will happen. It's more that Windows PCs are no longer at the center of users' experiences.
When the lock on the "clients" goes away, as it is now doing, then Microsoft's lock on the server-client interaction is worth much less than it previously was. You can't automatically sell Windows Server 20xx because it's the only thing that integrates "fully" with Windows "n" (n being some number such as 7, 8 etc).
Those heady days are gone. Steve Ballmer just hasn't realized it yet.
why? Why indeed !
"The data raises the obvious question: If automatically retiring Autorun reaped such clear benefits, why didn't Microsoft do it years ago?"
Because there was NO ADVANTAGE TO MICROSOFT for doing it.
It seems that now there is, what with its previously-unassailable OS dominance under threat from various groups that no longer accept the prevalence of zero-day attacks.
somewhat inaccurate
Revenue is down, not number of units or storage-volume shipped.
It's mainly that prices are down - HDDs are getting cheaper
problem looming
One problem that Microsoft has with the "everyone uses it at home" scenario is that around 50% of college students are choosing Macs.
This, and the "iPhone + iPod halo", will have a serious and long-lasting impact on the Windows-at-work hegemony.
no lawsuit - dang
It's a pity that Lodsys didn't start with filing suit, as Righthaven did.
Because then Apple could object to any attempt to withdraw the suit and make sure the case was heard and the patent invalidated.
Pity they can't do that. These patent trolls deserved it.
facial recognition
So good? Meh.
It's not yet good enough to differentiate between a face on a body on the street and and image of Col. Sanders on a signboard outside a KFC.
Cracks me up every time I see that.
ticket
The original 16c is the real ticket.
Still have mine - won't part with it
bloatware
So bloatware will now be server-based rather than consuming your local drive?
And this is better than Linux - why ??
solution is simple
The solution is simple. Google did it after being hacked, it's now time for ORNL and others to follow suit.
Ban Windows from any sites/networks with sensitive data
of course ...
Of course, Siemens *is* responsible.
After all, was it not Siemens that chose *Windows* as the OS for their system??
And the Iranians are just as culpable. Did they not choose to buy a SCADA system whose OS was *Windows*.
Do not blame malfeasance for that which can be explained by stupidity.
Mac users
If you use command-line then the simple way to disable IPv6 for all interfaces is
sudo ip6 -x
got the message
Google got the message -- Windows is banned.
Your turn, RSA.
posts
posts like these make clear the cause of UK IT generally being such a disaster
a title is required
it seems to me that there are several reasons for the sequence so far. Obviously, removing surface-to-air capability is crucial, and severing command-and-control links is high up on the list.
Taking out an armoured column clearly removes that as a threat but also says "who's next" to the mercenaries. They're not part of the tribes and peeling them off is essential so that the Libyans can solve their own problem. Given the results of the past day or so, I would expect that many will be heading out very soon.
Happy Birthday is OK
Without getting too deep into the religious aspect of things, "Happy Birthday" is not entirely inappropriate for a Christmas card. In fact, some folks would think it very good.
Page: