Posts by Fox 23 publicly visible posts • joined 29 Dec 2007
Nice to see something of such an unusually high quality emanating from Redmond. Especially something as venerable as "research". Wonderful.
I look forward to them "proving" that it's Father Christmas who eats the mince pies the kiddies leave at the fireplace. MMMMMmmmmmmmmmmmm... mince pies.
Sorry, wrong number.
No Icon for David Icke so had to make do.
Why?
Why should you "...really comare a to another 'big name' manufacturer."?
The kit Shakje selected for his comparison was all perfectly respectable and comparable stuff - and available from a vast range of sources. I think that may be the point he was making!
Why is it that Apple fanboys seem to *expect* to be exploited by a "big name" corporation? Bless them.
The icon (irony alert) is sarcasm btw.
A fair point, but I fear flawed... Doesn't the term "Sun reader" imply an ability to read? - a skill which might qualify the voter as unusually sophisticated in the asbo era.
To those who are offended by Glyn RE: "Not saying that being gay is the same as being a paedophile, but it's the closest equivalent":
I think what he is getting at is the similar [sexuality vs legality] which gays have enjoyed at times - the situation a hundred years ago (or there abouts) for example. Seen as persecution now, but no doubt equally righteous at the time. I very much doubt that he meant to imply that homosexuality is comparable to paedophilia in any broader context!
"Keep in mind, Open Office and the ODF standard are both derived by inspection and reverse engineering of Microsoft Office and its formats, not from years of research and development and user studies, which is what Microsoft did."
What planet are you from? You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Perhaps you have confused ODF and DOC?
ODF: Open and transparent data format & specification which was indeed painstakingly developed through much r&d by the ODF Alliance - a consortium of thirty-odd separate IT companies. You may even have heard of some of them on your planet... IBM, Novell, Sun, etc. ODF is well documented and free to use - by *anyone*.
DOC: Willfully opaque binary blob contrived by Micro$haft specifically to be difficult to inter-operate with. This *was* successfully reverse engineered, after "years of painstaking r&d" by a German company called Star Division. It was this breakthrough in 1999 which has enabled third parties like OOo, Google etc to achieve their "compatibility" with the .doc format - in spite of Micro$haft. Open Office's ability to read .doc files is *NOT* ODF!
There you go - simple really. I hope you understand now Don. I hope too that you understand that public communications have come a long way since the days of DR DOS - your v5 FUD module has been rendered obsolete. Please report to Micro$haft for an upgrade.
FUD rating: 1/10
Go Norway! Give 'em hell.
Anyone know where to sign up for those Virgle one-way tickets? I want to get off this shithole.
The ISO have put "Subject to there being no formal appeals from ISO/IEC national bodies in the next two months, the International Standard will accordingly proceed to publication." right in the middle of their press release though... an invitation? Perhaps there's still hope for our species.
Had the proposal been rejected then *everyone* would have won. Micro$haft have just as much right and ability to use ODF as the "unwashed hippy open source gang" and everyone else.
They NEVER will implement odf you say? Why could that be? Isn't that what "standards" exist to protect us from? I feel sick.
Yep, they've been done over too. I think you'll find they are called "Cadbury's Creme Eggs" now. Have been for some time.
Something to do with some standards body, or somesuch, I believe.
Quite how Cadbury's are allowed to persist with the blatant deception of calling them "eggs" beggars belief... they made a horrible mess of the pan last time I tried to make an omlette :-( I reckon the standards droids should go all the way and insist on "creme oviforms". Think I'll write to Mr Brown.
Our lords and masters needed the money to fund yet another half witted publicity stunt.
They've destroyed something truly innovative (so innovative that a pack of Luddites clearly couldn't comprehend it) and bought us a load of hot air instead. Nice one Mr Brown.
The "regulator" should decree that if either M$ or Google want a chunk of Yahoo then they'll just have to come up with a joint bid - for which each would acquire the Yahoo! services appropriate to maintain competition.
M$ could have the search tools which they claim to be so interested in, perhaps along with mapping etc. Thus forming The Microhoo! Corporation.
Menwhile Google could acquire Yahoo!'s webmail and Messenger businesses, along with vairious OSS whatnots and become Googley.
There you go. Simple! ...and everyone's happy. Right, I'm off to the pub.
If M$ and Google don't like the idea, which could, conceivably, happen, they can just piss off.
'Eiberg noted that the blue eyes mutation is neither "positive nor negative", since it doesn't affect chances of survival.'
I've noted the opposite - hasn't he noticed the conspicuous variation of distribution of the trait according to latitude?
I remember, some time ago, reading a fascinating and compelling hypothesis about a possible reason for there being so many gingers up north.
If memory serves, Scottish types studied and found to have a far greater than normal frequency of the MC1R mutation - which results in their ruddy colouring. The MC1R mutation for red hair seems uncannily similar to the OCA2 mutation which produces blue eyes. Both are mutations of genes involved in melatonin pigmentation, both mutations result in a reduction of pigmentation (individuals exhibiting both traits are considered "fair" - less skin pigmentation and more susceptible to sunburn), both mutations are recessive, the presence of a twin set of either mutated gene is betrayed by an obvious (though possibly less significant) physical trait (hair or eye colour).
The theory goes that because the fairer skin of individuals exhibiting traits of the MC1R mutation (I'm extrapolating this to OCA2 too) will tan less quickly/deeply when exposed to the precious few hours of sunshine they get up north, therefore they will produce more vitamin D during the summer. That extra vitamin D can be stored into the gloomy winter and help fend off the ravages of Rickets etc. So, if you live somewhere with a shitty climate, having fairer skin which tans poorly gives you a huge evolutionary advantage - blue eyes and red hair will proliferate. Conversely, if you live in the baking sun you'd be burnt to a crisp - blue eyes and red hair will die out.
It seems silly to muse that the mutation is "neither positive nor negative". ...and this is before you factor in any subjective effects such as attractiveness. I for one have a real weakness for blue eyed brunettes and welcome our new D enriched overloards.
Paris because of her apparent Nordic colouring.
I cant help wondering why so many comments seem to be taking Micro$oft's spin on this at face value, are people REALLY that gullible?
"We would value the opportunity to further discuss with you how to optimize the integration of our respective businesses to create a leading global technology company with exceptional display and search advertising capabilities." blah blah blah...
This is (presumably) a reference to Yahoo!'s search engine interests? Hmmm... is that really what's peaked Big Green's (envy) interest? Really? Just the cranky old, comparatively insignificant, search engine? I didn't notice any reference to any of Yahoo!'s other services. Perhaps Mr Ballmer isn't aware of them...
Instant Messaging market share
http://www.bigblueball.com/forums/general-other-im-news/34413-im-market-share.html
2006:
* AOL: 53 million
* MSN: 27 million
* Yahoo!: 22 million
* Google: 866,000
Post takover:
* AOL: 53 million
* Microhoo!: 49 million
* Google: 0.9 million
Webmail market share:
http://weblogs.hitwise.com/bill-tancer/2008/02/microsoft_and_yahoo_putting_th.html
2008 (US):
* Yahoo!: 55%
* Microsoft: 26%
* Google: 6%
Post takeover:
* Microhoo!: 80%
* Google: 6%
...and so it goes on. In fact, of the 15 categories compared by Hitwise, Yahoo! dominates all but 2 (searches and maps).
It's the *SEARCHES* you're interested in though, right Steven?
"Today this market is increasingly dominated by one player."
...that'll be Microhoo! then!
...sounds strangely familiar. Oh that's right, it's the sort of sharp marketing practice which the mobile comms cartel^H^H^H^H^H^H industry imposes on its poor consumers.
Suddenly they think this sort of thing is unfair do they?
I haven't laughed so much in ages.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
