Oracle Buys Sun 906

Posted by CmdrTaco on Monday April 20, 2009 @08:11AM from the there-can-be-only-one dept.

bruunb writes "Oracle Corporation (NASDAQ: ORCL) and Sun Microsystems (NASDAQ: JAVA) announced today they have entered into a definitive agreement under which Oracle will acquire Sun common stock for $9.50 per share in cash. The transaction is valued at approximately $7.4 billion, or $5.6 billion net of Sun's cash and debt. 'We expect this acquisition to be accretive to Oracle's earnings by at least 15 cents on a non-GAAP basis in the first full year after closing. We estimate that the acquired business will contribute over $1.5 billion to Oracle's non-GAAP operating profit in the first year, increasing to over $2 billion in the second year. This would make the Sun acquisition more profitable in per share contribution in the first year than we had planned for the acquisitions of BEA, PeopleSoft and Siebel combined,' said Oracle President Safra Catz."

Comment i wouldn't trust that site (Score 1) 585

by markandrew on Wednesday January 28, 2009 @01:24PM (#26641083) Attached to: Please No, Not a Blade Runner Sequel

how much credence do i give to the information on this (sffmedia) site?

Ridley Scott, director of the science fiction masterwork Blade Runner, hasn't made a science fiction movie since Alien in 1979

I don't even know what the name for that kind of sentence is. Apart from "stupid".

Google Challenging Proposition 8 1475

Posted by kdawson on Friday January 16, 2009 @02:50PM from the not-being-evil dept.

theodp writes "Coming the day after it announced layoffs and office closures, Google's California Supreme Court filing arguing for the overturn of Proposition 8, which asks the Court not to harm its ability to recruit and retain employees, certainly could have been better timed. Google's support of same-sex marriage puts it on the same page with Dan'l Lewin, Microsoft's man in Silicon-Valley, who joined other tech leaders last October to denounce Prop 8 in a full-page newspaper ad. But oddly, Microsoft HR Chief Mike Murray cited religious beliefs for his decision to contribute $100,000 to 'Yes On 8', surprising coming from the guy who had been charged with diversity and sensitivity training during his ten-year Microsoft stint. "

Apple's Life After Steve Jobs 405

Posted by CmdrTaco on Wednesday January 07, 2009 @11:59AM from the cut-the-turtleneck-budget-in-half dept.

animusCollards writes "Slate ponders a post-Steve Jobs Apple, including possible successors, and the future is... boring. '..it's certainly true that Jobs' style is central to the company's brand and the fierce connection it forges with its customers. His product announcements prompt hundreds of millions of dollars worth of free press coverage and whip up greater and more loyal fans, generating ever-greater interest in the company. ... At some point, all that will end. Jobs will eventually leave the company. There are no obvious plans for succession; in addition to Schiller, observers finger Tim Cook, Apple's COO, and Scott Forstall, who helped develop Mac OS X and the iPhone's software, as contenders for the job. But Tuesday's keynote illustrated how difficult it will be for any of those guys to replace Jobs.'"

Comment Just as chrome helps Opera, Apple blocks them (Score 2, Informative) 187

by Chris_Keene on Thursday October 30, 2008 @04:31PM (#25574871) Attached to: Chrome Helping Other Browsers Out, Says Opera CEO

Apple Blocking Opera on the Iphone
http://www.osnews.com/comments/20455

(blocking legit apps on the iphone is one of the stupidest things Apple has done in a long time)

Feds Tighten DNS Security On .Gov 140

Posted by CmdrTaco on Monday September 22, 2008 @09:11AM from the totally-safe-we-promise dept.

alphadogg writes "When you file your taxes online, you want to be sure that the Web site you visit — www.irs.gov — is operated by the Internal Revenue Service and not a scam artist. By the end of next year, you can be confident that every U.S. government Web page is being served up by the appropriate agency. That's because the feds have launched the largest-ever rollout of a new authentication mechanism for the Internet's DNS. All federal agencies are deploying DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC) on the .gov top-level domain, and some expect that once that rollout is complete, banks and other businesses might be encouraged to follow suit for their sites. DNSSEC prevents hackers from hijacking Web traffic and redirecting it to bogus sites. The Internet standard prevents spoofing attacks by allowing Web sites to verify their domain names and corresponding IP addresses using digital signatures and public-key encryption."

Fast-Booting Text-Editor Operating System? 660

Posted by timothy on Saturday September 20, 2008 @04:29PM from the hell-you-say dept.

cgenman writes "What is the fastest booting operating system out there that is still sufficient for editing text? Quite frequently, I'll need to boot my laptop and edit a few lines of text, or jot down an idea or two. XP loads in roughly 4 minutes to usable, and Ubuntu loads in about 60 seconds. Both feel like an eternity if there isn't a pen and paper around. What is the best operating system that people have found which would load to useable in under 20 seconds, can edit text files in something a little more friendly than VI or EMACS, yet can still access fat32 formatted USB drives? GUIs aren't required, but commands which require arcane foreknowledge or a cheat sheet are out."

Congress May Kill NIH Open Access Research Rules 105

Posted by kdawson on Tuesday September 16, 2008 @04:49PM from the you-paid-for-it-now-we-own-it dept.

Savuka writes "A policy that mandates public, open access to all National Institutes of Health research is in danger. The House of Representatives is considering legislation that would change the open access policy to make it more publisher-friendly, under the false pretense of protecting copyrights. The Ars author paints the new legislation as somewhat reflective of a turf battle in Congress: 'The Intellectual Property Subcommittee clearly felt that it had been ignored during the original passage of the bill that compelled the NIH's open access policy...' The article concludes: 'Currently, the disruptions wrought by the Internet and expectations of open access are too new for a viable alternative to traditional publishing to have emerged. But it doesn't appear that the NIH policy is making a significant contribution to that disruption, and the benefits of the policy appear likely to be significant. If Congress rolls back that policy in response to disagreements with other countries over film piracy, then it could really be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.'"

Submission + - Royal Society 'Creationism' resigns (bbc.co.uk)

Submitted by

Chris_Keene

on Tuesday September 16, 2008 @03:53PM

Chris_Keene writes: "The BBC reports that Professor Michael Reiss who recently caused a storm with comments about teaching creationism in schools has resigned from his post as director of education at the Royal Society. Turns out 'creationism should be taught in science classes' was a bit of a misquote. The highly respected Lord Prof Robert Winston said "This is not a good day for the reputation of science or scientists. This individual was arguing that we should engage with and address public misconceptions about science — something that the Royal Society should applaud.""

Submission + - Congress may kill NIH open access research rules (arstechnica.com)

Submitted by Savuka on Tuesday September 16, 2008 @03:37PM

Savuka writes: A policy that mandates public, open access to all National Institutes of Health research is in danger. The House of Representatives is considering legislation that would change the open access policy to make it more publisher-friendly, under the false pretenses of protecting copyrights. One critic of the current open access policy said it would 'destroy the commercial market' and leave science without a peer-review system. When asked if the NIH could manage peer reviewing, something it already does with grants, Oman had a reasonable answer--not without increasing its budget to cover the cost--but buried it in rhetoric about "a healthy distrust for the hairy snout of government," and his "great confidence in the private sector." Apparently, he does not own stock in Shearson Lehman or AIG.'

Mozilla Admits Firefox EULA Is Flawed 312

Posted by kdawson on Tuesday September 16, 2008 @02:25PM from the sudden-outbreak dept.

darthcamaro writes "Mozilla has now come around and is taking seriously the concerns of Ubuntu and others about the Firefox EULA, which we discussed vigorously the other day. In fact Mozilla told InternetNews.com that the EULA itself is flawed and will be replaced with something else. Quoting Mozilla Chairperson Mitchell Baker from the article: 'There is a need for something, something to explain the license[.] I'm not sure I would call it a EULA because that has a meaning to many people of adding restrictions to software and we won't be doing that. We'll be having a license agreement much as Red Hat has a license agreement that says the software is available under the GPL and don't use our trademarks et cetera. So we'll have a license agreement but we won't think of it as a EULA.'"

Google Chrome, the Google Browser 807

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Monday September 01, 2008 @01:09PM from the fun-unfounded-rumor dept.

Philipp Lenssen writes "Google announced their very own browser project called Google Chrome — an announcement in the form of a comic book drawn by Scott McCloud, no less. Google says Google Chrome will be open source, include a new JavaScript virtual machine, include the Google Gears add-on by default, and put the tabs above the address bar (not below), among other things. I've also uploaded Google's comic book with all the details (details given from Google's perspective, anyway... let's see how this holds up). While Google provided the URL www.google.com/chrome there's nothing up there yet."

Firefox SSL-Certificate Debate Rages On 733

Posted by kdawson on Friday August 22, 2008 @08:27AM from the four-screens-i-mean-really dept.

BobB-nw points out the ever more raucous debate over the way Firefox 3 handles self-signed certificates. The scary browser warnings have affected a number of legitimate sites (such as Google AdWords and LinkedIn) that didn't renew certs in time. Lauren Weinstein loudly called attention to the problem early in July. "If you visit a website with either an expired or a self-signed SSL certificate, Firefox 3 will not show that page at all. Instead it will display an error message... To get past this error page, users have to go through four different steps before they can access the website, which from a usability standpoint is far from ideal. This way of handling websites with expired or self-signed SSL certificates is bound to scare away a lot of inexperienced users, no matter how legitimate the website is."

Comment Re:Assuming that Google could reach consciousness (Score 1) 346

by markandrew on Wednesday July 30, 2008 @12:51PM (#24404139) Attached to: Are We Searching Google, Or Is Google Searching Us?

amino acids aren't the program in this instance, though - they're merely the instructions for the building blocks to create the entity that runs the program.

it's one thing to say "we are defined by dna", and quite another to say "our brains are just a computer running a complex program", and just because one statement may be true doesn't mean that the other one is

Microsoft Blesses LGPL, Joins Apache Foundation 425

Posted by timothy on Friday July 25, 2008 @06:09PM from the could-be-the-largest-free-software-vendor dept.

Penguinisto writes "According to a somewhat jaw-dropping story in The Register, it appears that Microsoft has performed a trifecta of geek-scaring feats: They have joined the Apache Software Foundation as a Platinum member(at $100K USD a year), submitted LGPL-licensed patches for ADOdb, and have pledged to expand their Open Specifications Promise by adding to the list more than 100 protocols for interoperability between its Windows Server and the Windows client. While I sincerely doubt they'll release Vista under a GPL license anytime soon, this is certainly an unexpected series of moves on their part, and could possibly lead to more OSS (as opposed to 'Shared Source') interactivity between what is arguably Linux' greatest adversary and the Open Source community." (We mentioned the announced support for the Apache Foundation earlier today, as well.)