Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Google's Beta (Score 1) 37

by 140Mandak262Jamuna (#48618057) Attached to: ODF Support In Google Drive
Well, almost all the software we pay for has boilerplate EULA that says, "We promise you lots of stuff. But if the software you bought for does not do it, well, tough luck buddy, suck it. Cant sue us". In fact some software actually said, "this software is not fit to do anything. not nuclear reactors definitely".

Comment: Google is very strategic. (Score 3, Interesting) 37

by 140Mandak262Jamuna (#48616253) Attached to: ODF Support In Google Drive
Everyone knew as long as MS-Office franchise is delivering money to Microsoft in fire hoses, there is no way anyone can compete with it in *any* sphere. It will sustain losses year after year to deny revenue to the competition. Once the competition folds it has the market for itself. Look how long it was able to sustain losses to gain dominance with XBox franchise. Everyone knew that. Many people had ideas to attack it, but lacked the resources. People with resources, I am looking at you Sun microsystems, lacked the competence to pull it off.

Google went about it strategically. First it peeled of the low hanging fruit, people who don't need all the bells and whistles of a full suite with Google docs/apps. Then it leveraged the central server doing the edits, to create a collaborative edit features that were well ahead of MsOffice when it was introduced. Priced it cheap, pitched it to the enterprises. When it was forcing Microsoft to scramble to offer collaboration tools, Apple helped in the upgrade tread mill battle. In an earlier era, the top exec gets the latest and greatest laptop every six months with latest Office pre-installed and starts belting out documents in the latest format. IT will upgrade rest of the corp. But Apple took all the top execs with its iPad, and now PC is not the latest toy these top honchos were getting. Side effect: The corporate upgrade treadmill slowed down significantly.

Now it is going for the last section that really needs all the bells and whistles of a full fledged office suite. Instead of spending the money to reinvent the wheel inside google docs, it is just using the well established code base of OpenOffice and the ODF. Even though Microsoft lost the mind share and the market share in percentage terms, its cash cows were producing milk at the same old prodigal rate. Cutting off a significant portion of the MsOffice revenue stream is important for Google's business ops in other spheres. Else Microsoft will under cut it. It even tried to pay people to use Bing.

Google does not really want to make much money off its google docs franchise. It uses it just to crimp the revenue stream of Microsoft. It is making money elsewhere.

Comment: Looks very dumb. (Score 1) 186

by 140Mandak262Jamuna (#48607581) Attached to: Jaguar and Land Rover Just Created Transparent Pillars For Cars
Already BMW uses two cameras under the wing mirrors and one rear facing camera to create a "top view" displayed in the console. It helps in parking. It would not be too much to use the same mirror cams to face rear wards at higher than parking speeds, and create a "front view" for display. Or use one or two more side facing cameras to create a clear picture of cars in the blind spot in the console.

Comment: There are only 48 bird species? (Score 1) 137

by 140Mandak262Jamuna (#48603601) Attached to: How Birds Lost Their Teeth
Very badly written article. The bad writing is not in the summary, it is in the original. There are about 4500 bird species. There are 48 orders. Species -> genus -> family -> order. All extant bird orders, and they took one sample species from each. The article has mangled the reporting of the original research.

Comment: Forbes has no standing to complain (Score 3, Interesting) 228

by 140Mandak262Jamuna (#48596683) Attached to: Forbes Blasts Latests Windows 7 Patch as Malware
Forbes faithfully parroted every Gartner study fully bought for by Microsoft, like the Total Cost of Ownership. It claimed Microsoft has reached a "utility" status and it should be considered a "widows-and-orphans" stock. It actively contributed to the culture of lazy CIOs choosing Microsoft because no one got fired for choosing Microsoft. It turned a blind eye to every illegal maneuver by Microsoft. Now, suddenly, it is blasting Microsoft? I think Microsoft is a lesser evil than Forbes.

Comment: I like Picassa (Score 1) 257

by 140Mandak262Jamuna (#48596659) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Best Software For Image Organization?
You organize the photos and folders any way you like. It does not modify any original photo or image file. Instead it scans the folders for new files, builds indexes such that you can view the photos either by folders, or by albums or by tagged faces etc. You can add captions to photos, and folders, search based on wild cards and then create an album out of search results. Has some other features like making collages out of selection, keeping a few albums synched with on line sharing, making slide show movies etc.

Comment: Why can't they use eminent domain? (Score 1) 262

There is already a well established practice by which the Government can show public interest, take over private property (after compensating the current owners) and use it for public purpose. In fact courts have ruled govt can even turn over the properties taken under eminent domain to other private parties! Why should the eminent domain be restricted to real estate? It can easily be extended to intellectual properties.

So instead of making general law changes asking for broad restrictions to patented drugs, the government can make the case for specific patents, show the public interest, take it over turn to the generic manufacturers.

Comment: Re:Ignored Niches (Score 1) 264

by 140Mandak262Jamuna (#48588483) Attached to: Apple's iPod Classic Refuses To Die
When they first broke into the music selling market, the entire music market was open, and the fastest way to make money is to sell music. A decade later most people who want to buy music, middle aged people nostalgic for their teenage music with money to burn, etc etc have been tapped out. They still have to show similar revenue, and revenue growth to satisfy the Wall St bean counters. When you have over 75% market share already, maintaining revenue and growth becomes increasingly difficult. At this point they want all new music to go into the rental model with continued revenue potential.

Take a look at the Microsoft MsOffice market. It was selling perpetual licenses, and to maintain revenue growth it kept raising the prices. After reaching impossible for software prices like 500$ for a full office suite, 150$ for Excel+Word they could not sustain it anymore. Google stepped in with a low end Cloud-Office suite at 50$ a pop per year and made serious inroads into MsOffice monopoly. The first serious challenge, the first challenge to MsOffice franchise that got traction was GoogleDocs. We might laugh at the mickey mouse features of GoogleDocs compared to MsOffice, we might see OpenOffice and LibreOffice are far more serious implementations. But, on the ground, GoogleDocs had just two things going for it. Extremely good collaboration features and a tempting "it is just 50$, let us try it for a while" price. Now Microsoft is pitching OfficeLive365 as 50$ a year all you can eat buffet. It used to sell the entire suite for 50$ in the 1990s, student version perpetual license were 30$ as recently 2009. Now?

Almost all the software companies want to go into subscription model, software as service, rent not own, model. All the media companies too. Price blue-ray disc at 25$, but stream HD rental at 5$. Rent, not own. That is the way all media and software companies are evolving into.

"Buy land. They've stopped making it." -- Mark Twain