Windows Vista Beta 2

[dkf747]

In english, M$ built the better browser and kill Netscape's spotlight. M$ make people love IE more. tsk tsk - brainwash! Now, thank to Firefox, it's ready to kill IE someday.... *crossing finger*
.

The first part you got right. MS built the better browser.

Firefox has a long way to go to kill IE. It doesn't look like it will ever do so though.

 

[Teresh]

The first part you got right. MS built the better browser.

Firefox has a long way to go to kill IE. It doesn't look like it will ever do so though.

Firefox is already better than IE... It has been for a long time. All it needs is better marketing.

 

[dkf747]

Firefox is already better than IE... It has been for a long time. All it needs is better marketing.

I like Firefox better too, but there are still too many sites where it doesn't work.

 

[diehardbiker]

You can actually "patented" your software if you want to, but the problem is... you'd be scared to show your serect in source code! That is why no software developer is willing to open up their source code. The only OS that allows open source coding is Linux!

Same concept with Coca~Cola! They can patent their orignal formula but they refused to release the information to patent office in fear of somebody stealing their formula while application is being processed in patent office.

Simple put, when you submit application to patent office, you can have your product stamped as "Patent pending", It is really meaningless and people will find out how you did this, and once your application has been rejected you expose all of your ideas to public instantly! And you stand to lose everything. The patent application process can take YEARS, YEARS, YEARS before the approval status is granted!

Patents are a creation of law. Patenting software isn't possible in most places on earth because patents are supposed to cover inventions, not ideas and software is the flowing concept of an idea. The US is really the only country in the world that has really accepted software patents. Europe and Asia have, comparatively, realised how stupid the idea is and decided not to recognize them.

Besides, blaming the victim is simple idiocy. It's not my fault for walking home if I get mugged.


Meh. There's no reason to use Windows anymore. All I've seen of Vista has been the same as 2003 with the exception of the start menu and the control panel looking a bit different. Oh, and the default wallpaper is different. Whoopee. There's nothing new to mention. If it took them five years to fracking change the default wallpaper and put a new skin on it, why should I waste my money on it?

 

[Teresh]

You can actually "patented" your software if you want to, but the problem is... you'd be scared to show your serect in source code!

Only in the United States... Microsoft is running into serious problems in Europe because the EU does not recognize software patents. Patenting software does not require releasing your source code. Source code is protected under copyright law, the same as other works. Patents exist to protect inventions and processes... Software patents are nonsense because they protect ideas, and ideas are generally considered fundamentally incompatible with the concept of a patent. But the US allows them for some stupid reason.

That is why no software developer is willing to open up their source code. The only OS that allows open source coding is Linux!

You can write open-source software for any operating system... There's actually quite a bit OSS for Windows. Additionally, a very significant portion of Mac OS X is open source (Darwin? Safari? XDarwin?), BSD is also open source, Sun has been opening up Solaris as of late. Linux isn't the only OS that open source software exists for, nor is it the only operating system that is open source itself.

Same concept with Coca~Cola! They can patent their orignal formula but they refused to release the information to patent office in fear of somebody stealing their formula while application is being processed in patent office.

You don't need to disclose source code for software patents... Even if you did, it would be protected under copyright law. Someone could not copy it and call it their own, as that would violate copyright law.

Simple put, when you submit application to patent office, you can have your product stamped as "Patent pending", It is really meaningless and people will find out how you did this, and once your application has been rejected you expose all of your ideas to public instantly! And you stand to lose everything. The patent application process can take YEARS, YEARS, YEARS before the approval status is granted!

Source code is protected under copyright law anyway, so what's your point?

 

[diehardbiker]

That is mistake, no what happen in EU is called anti-trust law. It have nothing to do with copyrights or patents. It is how the business practice had gone with Micro$oft. If you do more research on these legal stuff, you will understand better. You see, Micro$oft have successfully destroyed Netscape, and that is illegal! How to prove in the United States? M$ can afford decent attorney to mess up the judge's mind. But with Europe, they got time limits and that is where M$ stumpled and couldn't build case that is too big to confuse the judge, smart of EU court!

Only in the United States... Microsoft is running into serious problems in Europe because the EU does not recognize software patents. Patenting software does not require releasing your source code. Source code is protected under copyright law, the same as other works. Patents exist to protect inventions and processes... Software patents are nonsense because they protect ideas, and ideas are generally considered fundamentally incompatible with the concept of a patent. But the US allows them for some stupid reason.



You can write open-source software for any operating system... There's actually quite a bit OSS for Windows. Additionally, a very significant portion of Mac OS X is open source (Darwin? Safari? XDarwin?), BSD is also open source, Sun has been opening up Solaris as of late. Linux isn't the only OS that open source software exists for, nor is it the only operating system that is open source itself.



You don't need to disclose source code for software patents... Even if you did, it would be protected under copyright law. Someone could not copy it and call it their own, as that would violate copyright law.



Source code is protected under copyright law anyway, so what's your point?

Copyright, that is if you can PROVE the date of its orignal creatation. That is why it is weakest protection you can get. If you pay attention to Blackberry case vs with NTP, Inc... right now NTP might have won... eventually RIM may win back. My point is if you don't reveal anything and lock it up, nobody would be able to steal your source code. But if you open it up for somebody to see, and then somebody CAN claim that I got it before you and see you in the court. Can it happen? OFC!

 

[Teresh]

That is mistake, no what happen in EU is called anti-trust law. It have nothing to do with copyrights or patents. It is how the business practice had gone with Micro$oft. If you do more research on these legal stuff, you will understand better. You see, Micro$oft have successfully destroyed Netscape, and that is illegal! How to prove in the United States? M$ can afford decent attorney to mess up the judge's mind. But with Europe, they got time limits and that is where M$ stumpled and couldn't build case that is too big to confuse the judge, smart of EU court!

We're talking about different problems for Microsoft in Europe. To imply I'm misinformed when this is the field I work in is just very silly (and incorrect). Open source is growing faster in Europe than it is in the US because Microsoft can't litigate against developers because there are no software patents. In the US, it at least would have legal basis to sue Samba over Active Directory support if they wanted to. In Europe, they don't, because Samba is 100% non-Windows code.

Copyright, that is if you can PROVE the date of its orignal creatation. That is why it is weakest protection you can get. If you pay attention to Blackberry case vs with NTP, Inc... right now NTP might have won... eventually RIM may win back. My point is if you don't reveal anything and lock it up, nobody would be able to steal your source code. But if you open it up for somebody to see, and then somebody CAN claim that I got it before you and see you in the court. Can it happen? OFC!

You have a very weak understanding of copyright law and patent law, then. RIM hasn't used any of NTP's source code. Stealing source code is ILLEGAL, and copyright law is enforceable. If you steal source code, you will probably be sued by the copyright holder. This is what's going on with the SCO lawsuits against IBM and Novell. SCO claims IBM and Novell leaked SCO's UNIX System V source code to the Linux kernel to be released under a license (the GPL) incompatible with the System V license. Whether or not this is actually true or not remains to be seen (SCO hasn't presented any evidence even though the case has been going on for a while). Comparatively, whenever a company attempts to steal the source code of a program released under the GPL for their own proprietary product, the Free Software Foundation threatens to sue them because it's illegal. DivX did it, and since then DivX has been in decline in favor of XviD, the open source codec on which DivX is based.

The RIM/NTP dispute is that NTP holds a *patent*, not a copyright, to what RIM's software does. The patent protects the idea, what the code is supposed to do, rather than a particular implementation of the idea. NTP coincidentally has never implemented its own idea in software, so it doesn't own any copyrights for implementations of its patents.

If you're a programmer, then you understand that there's often a lot of different ways to do the same thing in programming... You can use different languages, different procedures, different kinds of loops, make different function calls (puts versus printf?), all sorts of different things. Patents for software don't cover the logic of how a program is written or how the idea is implemented, they only cover the end result of what the program does.

 

[web730]

Micro$oft announced that they will delay the date bit to release the Windows Vista to January 2007.

Too bad for the computer makers and retails to miss their great opportunities to make money for the holidays 2006.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11947922/

 

[EDGE]

Well, that's good news.

 

[neecy]

Micro$oft announced that they will delay the date bit to release the Windows Vista to January 2007.

Too bad for the computer makers and retails to miss their great opportunities to make money for the holidays 2006.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11947922/

No surprise there. I don't think the folks in Redmond have EVER shipped an OS on time.

 

[LinuxGold]

Interesting conversations going on here...

One question, will IE pass ACID 2 test? (IE7 development team says that they won't pass ACID 2 test.)

Konqueror and Safari passed it. Opera passed it too I think...

 

[Teresh]

One question, will IE pass ACID 2 test? (IE7 development team says that they won't pass ACID 2 test.)

Microsoft has a way of ignoring standards... No, it won't pass Acid2. I have doubts even IE8 and IE9 will pass Acid2.

Konqueror and Safari passed it. Opera passed it too I think...

Safari was first, Konqueror was second. iCab and Opera have also since passed it.

 

[SimpleMan]

With this talk of Vista, Im surprised nobody has mentioned DRM and M$ further attempts to control our pcs.

 

[Teresh]

With this talk of Vista, Im surprised nobody has mentioned DRM and M$ further attempts to control our pcs.

Sir, you will have to come with us.



Nothing to see here, move along.

 

[LinuxGold]

Microsoft has a way of ignoring standards... No, it won't pass Acid2. I have doubts even IE8 and IE9 will pass Acid2.



Safari was first, Konqueror was second. iCab and Opera have also since passed it.

You're right in that specific order.

I wonder, how stable will that new OS be?

 

[Teresh]

You're right in that specific order.

I wonder, how stable will that new OS be?

Probably as unstable as Windows XP. Maybe twice as much! Go Microsoft!

 

[LinuxGold]

Probably as unstable as Windows XP. Maybe twice as much! Go Microsoft!

And yet postponed off to 2007, a true indication of unstability maturing into perfection.