Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.

Homer's picture

Microsoft loses 90 Billion Dollars

And it's only the beginning of the second half of 2008!

Another 90 Billion down the pan, and there won't be a Microsoft much longer.

WOOT!

Bloomberg.com: Exclusive

Microsoft, the biggest software maker, has lost about $90 billion in market value this year as Ballmer vacillated on Yahoo and failed to show how he would crack Google Inc.'s dominance of Internet advertising.

Microsoft is quickly shaping up to be the next SCO.

Homer's picture

More Microsoft Dirty Tricks History

In the wake of the death of Joe Barr, Linux.com's editor, I've been reacquainting myself with his work, and his insights into Microsoft's earlier "dirty tricks". I was vaguely familiar with some of this, but it's worth remembering that Microsoft's racketeering techniques are hardly new ... they've been doing this stuff since day one.

I may end up adding this to the collection at Grokdoc's Dirty Tricks History wiki pages, but for now - here's a sample:

Homer's picture

OOXML: Dissecting the Binary Blob Problem

For those who think that the "binary blob" situation is exactly the same with ODF as OOXML, please read the following:

Homer's picture

The "Right" to Own Knowledge

The Thinker

Two people on opposite sides of the world have exactly the same idea at the same time. Which one of those two people would be most morally justified in claiming to own the exclusive rights to that idea?

Should it be the first to dash through the doors of the USPTO office, with a big wad of cash in his hand?

Isn't that just further rewarding someone for already being affluent (or quick, or both), rather than rewarding him for having an original thought?

And how original are anyone's thoughts anyway?

Surely our knowledge is merely the sum of what we have been taught, and not some divine gift handed down from God, entitling the bearer to exclusive privileges. How can anyone claim exclusive rights to that which has been collected from others, such as authors; teachers; parents and peers? Are those contributors not equally entitled to attribution and rights to that knowledge? Are such contributors not also entitled to benefit from those ideas? Given the scope of where one acquires knowledge, shouldn't those beneficiaries encompass all mankind?

This is the essence of Free Software.

Homer's picture

Official Notice to the Associated Press

The following copyright notice applies only to The Associated Press; its subsidiary holdings; partners and members. To find out why, click here.

All non-derivative content of this site is © 2006 - 2017 Slated.org unless otherwise stated. No reproduction without permission. Licensed permission shall only be granted upon written request and subsequent agreement by each licensee to pay the sum of £1,000,000 (one million UK pounds sterling) per element per instance of reproduction.

Syndicate content