What's so different about setting up a Windows PC that requires "hours" more time? Individually plugging in the monitor and speakers isn't exactly a time sink. You have to spend a few minutes going through the Windows setup process, but I assume there was something similar on an iMac. Or was it just a single-user-account computer?
No, installing Windows without a slipstream disk generally takes at least a couple of hours. Remember, it's not just the painfully slow install process, it's also the fact that you have to attach your unpatched, insecure computer to the internet to download the latest security patches.
1) Oracle OWNS Solaris and the SPARC architecture - they were never free to begin with, they have always been owned,
Um, actually no they don't. I used to work in the offices of the non-profit that owns to the rights to SPARC hardware. It's an organization called SPARC International, Inc. and they make money off of licensing the trademark. If you pay up enough, your company can have a seat on the executive board of the organization, along with Oracle, Fujitsu amongst several others.
I run Windows 7 right now. I see absolutely zero compelling reasons to upgrade to Windows 8, and plenty of compelling reasons not to. I don't have to switch to Linux for Microsoft to lose out on my money. I just have to not buy any more of their products.
Same here, except I saw absolutely zero compelling reason to upgrade from XP. Granted I was in charge of our companies compatibility with the Vista developer beta so I also had many, many disincentives to upgrade.
Game changers earn a short-term first-mover advantage, and given the revenues generated from Apple's iPhone division I don't think they've had any shortage of THAT.
Disagree, a game changer idea is just an idea. The product/theory serves as a vehicle for the diffusion of the concept. Products drive innovative ideas, not the other way around. How quickly and how far the idea spreads is dependent upon the quality of the product and the elegance of it's design.
Ultimately, nobody outside of the industry cares about the industry so a badly implemented idea is irrelevant to them.
Longer term, people will copy innovators and incrementally improve on their new technology, and everybody benefits as a result, in the form of accelerated innovation and lower prices.
Evidently somebody forget to tell that to Microsoft, because they've been ripping people off for years and making a shit ton of money doing so.
Businesses exist to make money, but in the absence of strong government regulation (and more importantly strong punitive action to back those regulations) businesses tend to take shortcuts by plagiarizing design to maximize profits and when this practice becomes widespread enough, there's no clear economic incentive for innovation amongst the industry.
As the law stands right now, competition is severely hindered in order to extract even more exorbitant revenue than what the Free Market(R) naturally has to offer. You can't have a competitive marketplace when you have to ask the incumbent's permission to compete with them.
I agree with you about how fucked up the US Patent system is, but I think in this case, Apple was more pissed about the infringements to it's design. Good visual design is not factually quantifiable, but the Patents have to be written so there are at least some guidelines for what companies can and can't do from a design standpoint to prevent what you're describing.
Incidentally I would say that I'm surprised that you're siding with Samsung given what they tried to pull: http://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/09/27/1748236/apple-says-samsung-3g-patents-violate-rand-requirements
Dictatorial control wrapped up in a shiny package, and the masses love it. It is the antithesis of the equalising power of technology that made the field so attractive to me in the first place.
Herein lies the problem: you are not everybody. I can't speak for the masses, but personally I'm only for open up to the point prior to having to run an anti-virus on my fucking phone. Openness is a good thing in the context of programming, but any halfway competent engineer will tell you that it makes for crap OS design.
Missing my mod points right now. Well played, sir. Well played.
Thank you, thank you, I'll be here...As long you're here, I'll always be here...;)
Nah, it's still the ending of 1984 that depresses me.
It's one thing for governments to be horrible to the people they're supposed to care for. I've come to terms with that.
It's when people are horrible to the people they care for that continues to surprise me.
The Government is made of people! IT'S MADE OF PEOPLE!
Link to Original Source
In 1998, work began on the Army’s Logistics Modernization Program (LMP). In April 2010, the General Accounting Office (GAO) issued their report "Actions Needed to Improve Implementation of the Army Logistics Modernization Program" (http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-461) about the status of LMP. LMP is now scheduled to be fully deployed in September 2016, 12 years later than originally scheduled, and 18 years after development first began! (Development of the often-maligned Duke Nukem Forever (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_Nukem_Forever) only took 15 years.)
Prime contractors Computer Sciences Corp, Accenture, IBM and CACI obviously have learned the "If you're not a part of the solution, there's good money to be made in prolonging the problem" lesson! (http://www.despair.com/consulting.html)"
Link to Original Source