A nice yarn, unburdened by any believable evidence.
They forced them to license the name and put it on those products. Rambus never manufactured anything.
Had you clicked the link in the summary you would have seen this as the second sentence:
The two have been mired in litigation since 1990, which is when Rambus first sought license fees and threatened infringement lawsuits against memory makers who turned to the popular SDRAM standard over its own.
Rambus started suing immediately after they formed the company.
The Rambus debacle actually pre-dates Slashdot.
The patent cat fight started in 1990, and slashdot started in 1997. It was old news by the time it was first mentioned on Slashdot.
Join a consortium to develop a standard, sneak out at a quarter to four and patent the whole thing behind everyone's back and start throwing sue balls at everyone. They never had an original idea, or a working product.
Nothing in bitcoin can infringe this new patent application, because bitcoin is prior art.
Its up to the patent to avoid bitcoin features.
Yeah, but start billing somebody every time they look at your page and you can guarantee that people won't be coming to your site very often, or the number of page views will go down quite a bit.
But to-date, nobody has set up a payment method that is as easy to get into as the one proposed here, and you end up having to create accounts all over the web, give out credentials to people you don't trust etc. If I could do it one place, and expect to see minuscule page view rates I think you could sell it.
All of the current methods of doing this are simply too expensive to process and the web sites have an inflated concept of their value.
This is due to the current ad based revenue model where advertisers end up paying anywhere from 10 cents to 4 or 5 bucks per click, and web site developers earn virtually nothing on those clicks, and the rest flows to google.
The actual cost of a web page view is minuscule, and the actual earnings a company needs to make are similarly small, because the volume of hits means they can make money even at 100th of a cent, or even less.
I tossed out a quarter of a cent in my example above, but that is very much probably excessive.
It would be hard to measure on a site like Slashdot, because just defining what is a Page View is not clear due to all the
server transactions that occur in support of posting.
But on CNN, or the NYT, or any blog site you are interested in, I think I could justify paying somewhere between 1/100th and 1/10th of a cent per story view (not the landing page).
Most of the problems were addressed in a Stanford Study and they all center around the friction and transaction costs..
When you don't understand encryption, it all looks like ROT13.
Best leave that to the big boys.
And being DJB, surely some of that 300 lines is comments insulting all his fellow cryptographers, the users, and generally complaining that the world is full of idiots?
Or, you could click the link and find out how wrong you are....
. Kind of hard to do with a single piece of equipment though.
The poster you are responding to spoke of blue-ray players in the plural. No risk of a single piece of equipment failing here.
Apparently being without a movie playing for more than 10 seconds is a very frightening thing. He needs multiple players
so that he has no single point of failure.
Trust my ass...
Sounds more like burying them in useless information to justify your high price of maintenance contracts.
People see through this snow job very quickly.
People want summary information, not line by line code change logs.
The OP asks "Can you provide PUBLICLY AVAILABLE REFERENCES on the pros and cons of open and honest communication of changes and bug fixes, especially in commercial environments?"
Well he may have asked for that, but I wager he knows better than to expect Slashdot to do his google work for him.
Instead, he gets a multitude of opinions, which, for someone too lazy to google, is all they deserve.
There are bugs in software. Everyone knows that.
All people want to know is that the big issues are fixed. New functionality is added, or old functionality is made easier to use.
Nobody cares about spelling errors corrected.
That kind of stuff is used to justify your job to your boss (found 17 client facing spelling errors, here is the list......
That isn't the kind of stuff any customer is looking for.
I find the whole topic rather contrived. Does this guy not use software purchased from others?
Does he sit waiting with baited breath for each release, and track down every minor change and spelling correction?
Who does that? Who would care?
Your customers are lucky, they get to know that something changed. If you were making 'cloud' software, they wouldn't know anything changed until they logged in one morning and things are broken.
Not sure you need that much detail to know something is happening and something changed.
Many companies just mention "bug fixes" as a general category that covers typos or potential problems that no one has actually reported.
We just mention things that users have reported, improvements they have asked for, and limitations that were removed and new capabilities added.
We've issued some updates with the single statement "Bug Fixes".
We've issued other updates that require extensive documentation changes as well as conversion steps to get to the new version.
But no one needs to see every t you belatedly cross or every i you finally got around to dotting. People want to see progress in features and functions, and as little disruption to their work flow as possible.
More likely they discovered early on that the best Indian Lawyers are a wise investment.
Never try to do business in a country without hiring a well connected local lawyer.
Nonsense, there at least 6 manufacturers making windows phones. They don't need to manufacturer their own.
But if they want to, They could buy HTC out of petty cash.