Science > Physics > Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
24 Jul 2005 06:04:38 AM |
| Object: |
Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
In an unprecedented theft, Microsoft tries to patent emoticons:
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220050156873%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20050156873&RS=DN/20050156873
Emoticons have been used in email and IRC and many other places ever
since the internet existed.
How long will the criminals in Redmond be allowed to continue to patent
the
software inventions done by others?
Is it not time to split that club up, in an operating system and an
appliction
program company?
So as to restore fair competition, and not force everybody for every
thing used
in every day life to sue MS, or challenge its stolen patents, as that
costs money,
and clearly Gate's tactics here are based on the expectation the small
companies
and people who came up with that idea will NOT be financially powerful
enough
to challence MS.
Should new nuclear weaopon testing be done in Redmond?
These questions need answering!
.
|
|
| User: "Richard Henry" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
24 Jul 2005 10:41:53 AM |
|
|
<panteltje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122203077.954880.25970@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
In an unprecedented theft, Microsoft tries to patent emoticons:
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220050156873%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20050156873&RS=DN/20050156873
Emoticons have been used in email and IRC and many other places ever
since the internet existed.
How long will the criminals in Redmond be allowed to continue to patent
the
software inventions done by others?
Ahem. Have you actually read the patent application? Do you understand
what is being claimed?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jan Panteltje" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
24 Jul 2005 11:46:10 AM |
|
|
On a sunny day (Sun, 24 Jul 2005 08:41:53 -0700) it happened "Richard Henry"
<rphenry@home.com> wrote in <7FOEe.114115$Qo.22597@fed1read01>:
<panteltje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122203077.954880.25970@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
In an unprecedented theft, Microsoft tries to patent emoticons:
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=
%2220050156873%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20050156873&RS=DN/20050156873
Emoticons have been used in email and IRC and many other places ever
since the internet existed.
How long will the criminals in Redmond be allowed to continue to patent
the
software inventions done by others?
Ahem. Have you actually read the patent application? Do you understand
what is being claimed?
I suggest YOU read it, assuming you know something about software and
programming in general of cause.
And then perhaps join the discussion with some real essence?
They claim just about EVERYTHING including the ;-) :-( and at the receiving
end automatically replacing these with some bitmap.
In the 25 points they mention, very little of what is CURRENTLY IN USE is
not covered.
This way of claiming would be similar to mentioning 25 ways the wheel is used:
1) for transport
2) for mechanisms that indicate time (such as but not only clocks).
etc etc.
Read to the end too, where they again make sure NOBODY escapes 'their' idea.
They are the worst of the worst, and nuclear testing is urgently required to
get weapons powerful enough to get rid of them.
I propose to do the testing in Redmond.
So as to defend free enterprise in America (and around the world).
This is of cause not the only patent they try based on common techniques.
And not the first they try that has as much prior art as the wheel.
It is a sad fact that the patent office even considers this....
Really political intervention is likely the only thing that can stop
Gate's abuse the size of his club.
Split it up!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Henry" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
24 Jul 2005 12:41:42 PM |
|
|
"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122223618.d8aaec892bfff82e310c835b1773a431@teranews...
On a sunny day (Sun, 24 Jul 2005 08:41:53 -0700) it happened "Richard
Henry"
<rphenry@home.com> wrote in <7FOEe.114115$Qo.22597@fed1read01>:
<panteltje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122203077.954880.25970@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
In an unprecedented theft, Microsoft tries to patent emoticons:
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p
=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=
%2220050156873%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20050156873&RS=DN/20050156873
Emoticons have been used in email and IRC and many other places ever
since the internet existed.
How long will the criminals in Redmond be allowed to continue to patent
the
software inventions done by others?
Ahem. Have you actually read the patent application? Do you understand
what is being claimed?
I suggest YOU read it, assuming you know something about software and
programming in general of cause.
And then perhaps join the discussion with some real essence?
They claim just about EVERYTHING including the ;-) :-( and at the
receiving
end automatically replacing these with some bitmap.
In the 25 points they mention, very little of what is CURRENTLY IN USE is
not covered.
I guess I'm just too dense. Which one (or more) of the 25 claims would
patent the use of ";-)" or ":-(" in email, usenet , or on-line documents?
Any attempt to patent ascii-text-character emoticons will lose to prior art
demonstrations.
This way of claiming would be similar to mentioning 25 ways the wheel is
used:
1) for transport
2) for mechanisms that indicate time (such as but not only clocks).
etc etc.
Read to the end too, where they again make sure NOBODY escapes 'their'
idea.
I don't like Microsoft, in general. I don't like software patents, in
general. I'm not worried about this attempt, for any application I have
interest in.
Oh, and ;-).
.
|
|
|
| User: "EinsteinHoax" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
24 Jul 2005 01:50:00 PM |
|
|
"Richard Henry" <rphenry@home.com> wrote in message
news:spQEe.115073$Qo.11277@fed1read01...
I guess I'm just too dense. Which one (or more) of the 25 claims would
patent the use of ";-)" or ":-(" in email, usenet , or on-line documents?
Any attempt to patent ascii-text-character emoticons will lose to prior
art
demonstrations.
According to the conspiracy logic he has created in this thread, microsoft
can patent the alphabet too, in fact any character of any kind, heck even
the number set... go Bill!
-- -- --
Tis of Crom, that is the true riddle of steel
--Bill "Hyperborian Programmer" Gates
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jan Panteltje" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
24 Jul 2005 02:38:41 PM |
|
|
On a sunny day (Sun, 24 Jul 2005 18:50:00 GMT) it happened "EinsteinHoax"
<newage@sendarico.net> wrote in <spREe.17629$gL1.17335@tornado.texas.rr.com>:
"Richard Henry" <rphenry@home.com> wrote in message
news:spQEe.115073$Qo.11277@fed1read01...
I guess I'm just too dense. Which one (or more) of the 25 claims would
patent the use of ";-)" or ":-(" in email, usenet , or on-line documents?
Any attempt to patent ascii-text-character emoticons will lose to prior
art
demonstrations.
According to the conspiracy logic he has created in this thread, microsoft
can patent the alphabet too, in fact any character of any kind, heck even
the number set... go Bill!
Well people read the postings by Einstein hoax in sci.physics, and see how
well informed that person is.
Microsoft needs to be split!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Henry" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
24 Jul 2005 05:47:23 PM |
|
|
"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122233943.a1213b3e321e0ce38013f68f89d352e9@teranews...
On a sunny day (Sun, 24 Jul 2005 18:50:00 GMT) it happened "EinsteinHoax"
<newage@sendarico.net> wrote in
<spREe.17629$gL1.17335@tornado.texas.rr.com>:
"Richard Henry" <rphenry@home.com> wrote in message
news:spQEe.115073$Qo.11277@fed1read01...
I guess I'm just too dense. Which one (or more) of the 25 claims would
patent the use of ";-)" or ":-(" in email, usenet , or on-line
documents?
Any attempt to patent ascii-text-character emoticons will lose to prior
art
demonstrations.
According to the conspiracy logic he has created in this thread,
microsoft
can patent the alphabet too, in fact any character of any kind, heck even
the number set... go Bill!
Well people read the postings by Einstein hoax in sci.physics, and see how
well informed that person is.
non sequitur
Microsoft needs to be split!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jan Panteltje" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
24 Jul 2005 01:17:53 PM |
|
|
On a sunny day (Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:41:42 -0700) it happened "Richard Henry"
<rphenry@home.com> wrote in <spQEe.115073$Qo.11277@fed1read01>:
Which one (or more) of the 25 claims would
patent the use of ";-)" or ":-(" in email, usenet , or on-line documents?
You are aware I am sure that 'characters' (like ';', '-', and ')' ARE drawn
on the screen as bitmaps ALWAYS?
For this there exist systems like true type font etc...
If the characters are read from ROM or some other memory makes no difference,
it is the (in your question the ASCII) code transmitted that selects these.
Look also at point 6.
It says basically: send ';-)' first, then follow up with the bitmap.
In point 21 they try to patent sending ANY picture.
The term 'character sequence' is fuzzy too, as you know we always send
'bytes' and in C those may be presented by the type 'character'.
Signed or unsigned 8 bits char comes to mind.
If that is a problem (from a legal point of view), then they have at least
covered all HEX transmissions of picture data!
And hex transmission of picture data (via text only channels) is for
example how we send MIMI type attachments via email and usenet.
I can go on and on, the patent is really TOO stupid, it should never have
been accepted for evaluation even.
We need to split up this Microsoft club, as was done with AT&T.
Then the OS will get fair completion, and so will the applications.
Prices will come down, and quality will go up.
better safety for the US too, as when Bill Gates and or Balmer dies, that
Microsoft may collapse in a short time.
It is better to have many specialized companies competing.
Split it up!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Henry" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
24 Jul 2005 01:55:08 PM |
|
|
"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122229084.1286823e55b9f51c7cde0c3af9463fdf@teranews...
On a sunny day (Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:41:42 -0700) it happened "Richard
Henry"
<rphenry@home.com> wrote in <spQEe.115073$Qo.11277@fed1read01>:
Which one (or more) of the 25 claims would
patent the use of ";-)" or ":-(" in email, usenet , or on-line documents?
You are aware I am sure that 'characters' (like ';', '-', and ')' ARE
drawn
on the screen as bitmaps ALWAYS?
For this there exist systems like true type font etc...
If the characters are read from ROM or some other memory makes no
difference,
it is the (in your question the ASCII) code transmitted that selects
these.
Look also at point 6.
It says basically: send ';-)' first, then follow up with the bitmap.
In point 21 they try to patent sending ANY picture.
The term 'character sequence' is fuzzy too, as you know we always send
'bytes' and in C those may be presented by the type 'character'.
Signed or unsigned 8 bits char comes to mind.
If that is a problem (from a legal point of view), then they have at least
covered all HEX transmissions of picture data!
And hex transmission of picture data (via text only channels) is for
example how we send MIMI type attachments via email and usenet.
Nice try. Is this the first patent you have read?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jan Panteltje" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
24 Jul 2005 02:36:27 PM |
|
|
On a sunny day (Sun, 24 Jul 2005 11:55:08 -0700) it happened "Richard Henry"
<rphenry@home.com> wrote in <iuREe.115649$Qo.15787@fed1read01>:
"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122229084.1286823e55b9f51c7cde0c3af9463fdf@teranews...
On a sunny day (Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:41:42 -0700) it happened "Richard
Henry"
<rphenry@home.com> wrote in <spQEe.115073$Qo.11277@fed1read01>:
Which one (or more) of the 25 claims would
patent the use of ";-)" or ":-(" in email, usenet , or on-line documents?
You are aware I am sure that 'characters' (like ';', '-', and ')' ARE
drawn
on the screen as bitmaps ALWAYS?
For this there exist systems like true type font etc...
If the characters are read from ROM or some other memory makes no
difference,
it is the (in your question the ASCII) code transmitted that selects
these.
Look also at point 6.
It says basically: send ';-)' first, then follow up with the bitmap.
In point 21 they try to patent sending ANY picture.
The term 'character sequence' is fuzzy too, as you know we always send
'bytes' and in C those may be presented by the type 'character'.
Signed or unsigned 8 bits char comes to mind.
If that is a problem (from a legal point of view), then they have at least
covered all HEX transmissions of picture data!
And hex transmission of picture data (via text only channels) is for
example how we send MIMI type attachments via email and usenet.
Nice try. Is this the first patent you have read?
You are just trolling. I know assume you are on the Microsoft payroll somehow,
or write for them.
You mention no facts, so either that or you know nothing about the subject both
legally and technically.
So please stop trolling.
As for the problem, yes, Microsoft needs to be split for a better world with
better quality software.
Split up Microsoft!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Henry" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
24 Jul 2005 05:46:46 PM |
|
|
"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122233822.88cb6dba252b365f2fc9d2189aa32271@teranews...
On a sunny day (Sun, 24 Jul 2005 11:55:08 -0700) it happened "Richard
Henry"
<rphenry@home.com> wrote in <iuREe.115649$Qo.15787@fed1read01>:
"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122229084.1286823e55b9f51c7cde0c3af9463fdf@teranews...
On a sunny day (Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:41:42 -0700) it happened "Richard
Henry"
<rphenry@home.com> wrote in <spQEe.115073$Qo.11277@fed1read01>:
Which one (or more) of the 25 claims would
patent the use of ";-)" or ":-(" in email, usenet , or on-line
documents?
You are aware I am sure that 'characters' (like ';', '-', and ')' ARE
drawn
on the screen as bitmaps ALWAYS?
For this there exist systems like true type font etc...
If the characters are read from ROM or some other memory makes no
difference,
it is the (in your question the ASCII) code transmitted that selects
these.
Look also at point 6.
It says basically: send ';-)' first, then follow up with the bitmap.
In point 21 they try to patent sending ANY picture.
The term 'character sequence' is fuzzy too, as you know we always send
'bytes' and in C those may be presented by the type 'character'.
Signed or unsigned 8 bits char comes to mind.
If that is a problem (from a legal point of view), then they have at
least
covered all HEX transmissions of picture data!
And hex transmission of picture data (via text only channels) is for
example how we send MIMI type attachments via email and usenet.
Nice try. Is this the first patent you have read?
You are just trolling. I know assume you are on the Microsoft payroll
somehow,
or write for them.
You mention no facts, so either that or you know nothing about the subject
both
legally and technically.
So please stop trolling.
I have no love for MicroSoft.
As for the problem, yes, Microsoft needs to be split for a better world
with
better quality software.
Split up Microsoft!
I agree.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
25 Jul 2005 03:41:27 AM |
|
|
In article <sTUEe.117118$Qo.86307@fed1read01>,
"Richard Henry" <rphenry@home.com> wrote:
"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122233822.88cb6dba252b365f2fc9d2189aa32271@teranews...
<snip>
As for the problem, yes, Microsoft needs to be split for a better world
with
better quality software.
Split up Microsoft!
I agree.
Sigh! Do you really, really want politicians in Washington
to tell people how to code? Be very careful what you ask
for.
/BAH
Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jan Panteltje" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
25 Jul 2005 06:58:25 AM |
|
|
On a sunny day (Mon, 25 Jul 05 08:41:27 GMT) it happened
wrote in <5o-dnQBM0fE5WHnfRVn-sQ@rcn.net>:
In article <sTUEe.117118$Qo.86307@fed1read01>,
"Richard Henry" <rphenry@home.com> wrote:
"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122233822.88cb6dba252b365f2fc9d2189aa32271@teranews...
<snip>
As for the problem, yes, Microsoft needs to be split for a better world
with
better quality software.
Split up Microsoft!
I agree.
Sigh! Do you really, really want politicians in Washington
to tell people how to code? Be very careful what you ask
for.
Do you belive in the American system, where free enterprise and
competition leads to a greater diversity, better quality, and lower
prices?
And a more powerful economy?
Having a monopolist player destroy that system is where politicians
can come in to protect.
It is exactly because of this that there are rules the game has to be played
by.
The game changes constantly, so the rules need to be adapted from time to time.
It was done with AT&T, and really, IT has taken of big time since then,
it can also be done with MS.
I hope I also replied with this to you other post with the same gist.
Split up Microsoft!
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
25 Jul 2005 06:04:53 AM |
|
|
In article <1122292715.efafc619e89fc2650d48116fd46ee432@teranews>,
Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 25 Jul 05 08:41:27 GMT) it happened
wrote in <5o-dnQBM0fE5WHnfRVn-sQ@rcn.net>:
In article <sTUEe.117118$Qo.86307@fed1read01>,
"Richard Henry" <rphenry@home.com> wrote:
"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122233822.88cb6dba252b365f2fc9d2189aa32271@teranews...
<snip>
As for the problem, yes, Microsoft needs to be split for a better
world
with
better quality software.
Split up Microsoft!
I agree.
Sigh! Do you really, really want politicians in Washington
to tell people how to code? Be very careful what you ask
for.
Do you belive in the American system, where free enterprise and
competition leads to a greater diversity, better quality, and lower
prices?
And a more powerful economy?
Having a monopolist player destroy that system is where politicians
can come in to protect.
It is exactly because of this that there are rules the game has to be
played
by.
The game changes constantly, so the rules need to be adapted from time to
time.
It was done with AT&T,
And take a good look at the biz. It sucks. The reason ATT
was brought into court was because they no longer delivered
the services that customers needed and wanted. Instead
of breaking up the business, allowing competition would have
done much better. The phone biz today sucks. I am paying
for what I didn't ask for. It's a cash cow for governments.
There is no comparison to Microsoft. So far the only cash
is campaign contributions.
..and really, IT has taken of big time since then,
IT is a different biz than the telephone biz that you
were using as an example.
it can also be done with MS.
No, it can't.
/BAH
Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jan Panteltje" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
25 Jul 2005 09:02:14 AM |
|
|
On a sunny day (Mon, 25 Jul 05 11:04:53 GMT) it happened
wrote in <WqCdncIug5LcennfRVn-rQ@rcn.net>:
In article <1122292715.efafc619e89fc2650d48116fd46ee432@teranews>,
Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 25 Jul 05 08:41:27 GMT) it happened
wrote in <5o-dnQBM0fE5WHnfRVn-sQ@rcn.net>:
In article <sTUEe.117118$Qo.86307@fed1read01>,
"Richard Henry" <rphenry@home.com> wrote:
"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122233822.88cb6dba252b365f2fc9d2189aa32271@teranews...
<snip>
As for the problem, yes, Microsoft needs to be split for a better
world
with
better quality software.
Split up Microsoft!
I agree.
Sigh! Do you really, really want politicians in Washington
to tell people how to code? Be very careful what you ask
for.
Do you belive in the American system, where free enterprise and
competition leads to a greater diversity, better quality, and lower
prices?
And a more powerful economy?
Having a monopolist player destroy that system is where politicians
can come in to protect.
It is exactly because of this that there are rules the game has to be
played
by.
The game changes constantly, so the rules need to be adapted from time to
time.
It was done with AT&T,
And take a good look at the biz. It sucks. The reason ATT
was brought into court was because they no longer delivered
the services that customers needed and wanted. Instead
of breaking up the business, allowing competition would have
done much better.
Well, Microsoft in a way also no longer delivers what people want.
They want a stable OS, and one that lasts, so you do not have to buy a new
version every 2 years or so.
And people usually want choice, so having some other companies design
nice applications versus what comes standard with MS windows would be
good.
However these companies cannot possibly exist if MS delivers all applications
free with the OS, and makes it technically impossible to interface with
that same OS because of hidden (propriety) protocols.
The phone biz today sucks. I am paying
for what I didn't ask for.
Not here in Europe, I think most people have one or more GSM(cell) phones
now, with a lot of features, mine has a camera, email, web access, sort
of a small organizer.
I can take pictures on holiday and send these to my PC.
Answering service etc..
The fixed line has DSL and runs several servers for a really reasonable
amount of money, the PC is on 24/7, I have VOIP.
In fact I pay less then 2 years ago, with a lot more features.
It's a cash cow for governments.
Here the gov got big money from selling the licenses to the cellphone
companies for the new frequencies.
But the rest is some money from value added taxes only from the consumers.
There is no comparison to Microsoft. So far the only cash
is campaign contributions.
OK, MS supports GWB, and thus also the slaughter in Iraq.
The more a reason to want to be able to use an OS from some other company.
How was it: 'You can have any color you like as long as it is black?'
sort of thing Ford did in the long ago past?
..and really, IT has taken of big time since then,
IT is a different biz than the telephone biz that you
were using as an example.
It is strongly related, the whole packet oriented networking, man some
25 years ago the telco here would go WILD if you even suggested such a
thing (I have designed for them).
They were even more 'to the rule' then the army and navy.
it can also be done with MS.
No, it can't.
Splitting it up in an operating system and application company makes
good sense in my view.
Microsoft needs to be split up!
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
26 Jul 2005 03:23:32 AM |
|
|
In article <1122300292.7e9c35998a78fecedecb77fb5ed2532b@teranews>,
Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 25 Jul 05 11:04:53 GMT) it happened
wrote in <WqCdncIug5LcennfRVn-rQ@rcn.net>:
In article <1122292715.efafc619e89fc2650d48116fd46ee432@teranews>,
Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 25 Jul 05 08:41:27 GMT) it happened
wrote in <5o-dnQBM0fE5WHnfRVn-sQ@rcn.net>:
In article <sTUEe.117118$Qo.86307@fed1read01>,
"Richard Henry" <rphenry@home.com> wrote:
"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122233822.88cb6dba252b365f2fc9d2189aa32271@teranews...
<snip>
As for the problem, yes, Microsoft needs to be split for a better
world
with
better quality software.
Split up Microsoft!
I agree.
Sigh! Do you really, really want politicians in Washington
to tell people how to code? Be very careful what you ask
for.
Do you belive in the American system, where free enterprise and
competition leads to a greater diversity, better quality, and lower
prices?
And a more powerful economy?
Having a monopolist player destroy that system is where politicians
can come in to protect.
It is exactly because of this that there are rules the game has to be
played
by.
The game changes constantly, so the rules need to be adapted from time
to
time.
It was done with AT&T,
And take a good look at the biz. It sucks. The reason ATT
was brought into court was because they no longer delivered
the services that customers needed and wanted. Instead
of breaking up the business, allowing competition would have
done much better.
Well, Microsoft in a way also no longer delivers what people want.
Sigh! They never did deliver what people wanted.
They want a stable OS, and one that lasts, so you do not have to buy a new
version every 2 years or so.
This is utterly stupid. If there is new hardware, the OS has
to change. If there are new kinds of computing services, the
OS has to change. When (not if) there are bug fixes, the
OS has to change.
Do you actually buy a car and expect to never have
anything in it changed?
And people usually want choice, so having some other companies design
nice applications versus what comes standard with MS windows would be
good.
No, they don't want choice. They want something that does
the job. The fact that every installation has a different
job to do is the reason there are more than one thingie out
there.
However these companies cannot possibly exist if MS delivers all
applications
free with the OS,
Nothing is ever free.
..and makes it technically impossible to interface with
that same OS because of hidden (propriety) protocols.
Which protocols are you talking about?
The phone biz today sucks. I am paying
for what I didn't ask for.
Not here in Europe, I think most people have one or more GSM(cell) phones
now, with a lot of features, mine has a camera, email, web access, sort
of a small organizer.
I can take pictures on holiday and send these to my PC.
Answering service etc..
Thank you for providing good examples of features that I don't
need nor want. Yet I'm paying for them.
The fixed line has DSL and runs several servers for a really reasonable
amount of money, the PC is on 24/7, I have VOIP.
In fact I pay less then 2 years ago, with a lot more features.
I don't want this. I don't need this.
It's a cash cow for governments.
Here the gov got big money from selling the licenses to the cellphone
companies for the new frequencies.
But the rest is some money from value added taxes only from the consumers.
They are called access fees in the US. And every subset of usage
has a 10% (or more) access fee. It can be raised without any
vote by Congress or the populace.
There is no comparison to Microsoft. So far the only cash
is campaign contributions.
OK, MS supports GWB, and thus also the slaughter in Iraq.
Oh, good grief. All corporations contribute to both parties.
They do not play at guessing games w.r.t. who might win one
position. Representatives and Senators from
all parties will be elected.
The more a reason to want to be able to use an OS from some other company.
How was it: 'You can have any color you like as long as it is black?'
sort of thing Ford did in the long ago past?
You don't have any idea what an OS is nor how it gets made.
..and really, IT has taken of big time since then,
IT is a different biz than the telephone biz that you
were using as an example.
It is strongly related, the whole packet oriented networking, man some
25 years ago the telco here would go WILD if you even suggested such a
thing (I have designed for them).
Sigh! 25 years ago is 1980. There was already extensive
networking going on. There were dedicated comm lines.
I've been told there was a comm line between Europe and
Russia back then. Like I said you don't know what you're
talking about.
If you want to learn more, look up X.25 history. That will
give you a start.
They were even more 'to the rule' then the army and navy.
Hopefully, they were even more strict about what kind of
crap could be put over the wires.
it can also be done with MS.
No, it can't.
Splitting it up in an operating system and application company makes
good sense in my view.
Yes, I know that is your view. I'm telling you that your view
is incorrect. It does not make good sense to have politicians
tell any soft/hardware company how to do its business. Once
the regulation door is opened, innovation will stop and
bugs will not get fixed without a mile high pile of government
paper work to approve the change.
Take a real good look at what kinds of hoops we had to hop
through in order to sell FORTRAN to a government agency.
Look up Navy Tests for that. And this had nothing to do
with security levels.
The only OS whose philosophy started with security is Multics.
Not only was the code written with security as the topmost
goal, the way the work was done had security as the topmost
goal.
Microsoft needs to be split up!
Micsoft needs something. Splitting it up will cause
two viruses, protected by government, to exist instead of one.
/BAH
Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jan Panteltje" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
26 Jul 2005 07:36:17 AM |
|
|
On a sunny day (Tue, 26 Jul 05 08:23:32 GMT) it happened
wrote in <lsWdnZxt5ORlj3vfRVn-jA@rcn.net>:
They want a stable OS, and one that lasts, so you do not have to buy a new
version every 2 years or so.
This is utterly stupid. If there is new hardware, the OS has
to change.
Nope, the drivers are the interface to the hardware.
And people usually want choice, so having some other companies design
nice applications versus what comes standard with MS windows would be
good.
No, they don't want choice. They want something that does
the job. The fact that every installation has a different
job to do is the reason there are more than one thingie out
there.
Wrong. 'Any color as long as it is black' was abandoned long time ago.
However these companies cannot possibly exist if MS delivers all
applications
free with the OS,
Nothing is ever free.
Beside the point.
Sunshine is free, air is free, Linux is free, you are still free
until locked up.
..and makes it technically impossible to interface with
that same OS because of hidden (propriety) protocols.
Which protocols are you talking about?
Hey, you claim to know so much (in the rest of your reply) so why
do you not know this?
Because the last time you tried to program something was when the
dinosaurs were roaming the earth?
The phone biz today sucks. I am paying
for what I didn't ask for.
Thank you for providing good examples of features that I don't
need nor want. Yet I'm paying for them.
You likely do not even have these in backward retarded US.
They are called access fees in the US. And every subset of usage
has a 10% (or more) access fee. It can be raised without any
vote by Congress or the populace.
What a place to live, glad I am not there, and have not missed it either.
There is no comparison to Microsoft. So far the only cash
is campaign contributions.
OK, MS supports GWB, and thus also the slaughter in Iraq.
You don't have any idea what an OS is nor how it gets made.
But I wrote 2.
Unlike you who got confused counting dinosaur eggs.
Sigh! 25 years ago is 1980. There was already extensive
networking going on. There were dedicated comm lines.
I've been told there was a comm line between Europe and
Russia back then. Like I said you don't know what you're
talking about.
Ah, and you just walk in to the local exchange and replace
all mechanical dialers with a packet oriented electronic switching
system just like that, and they will let you do it, and say thank you?
Dreamer.
They were even more 'to the rule' then the army and navy.
Hopefully, they were even more strict about what kind of
crap could be put over the wires.
This is correct, the certification for anything like a modem
was very strict.
Splitting it up in an operating system and application company makes
good sense in my view.
Yes, I know that is your view. I'm telling you that your view
is incorrect. It does not make good sense to have politicians
tell any soft/hardware company how to do its business. Once
the regulation door is opened, innovation will stop and
bugs will not get fixed without a mile high pile of government
paper work to approve the change.
Take a real good look at what kinds of hoops we had to hop
through in order to sell FORTRAN to a government agency.
Look up Navy Tests for that. And this had nothing to do
with security levels.
Navy??? How about that ship that got out of control when Microsoft
windows gave the blue screen.
Was that not an aircraft carrier?
The only OS whose philosophy started with security is Multics.
Dunno what that was.
Here we had Unix, and it has security as part of it.
There were other military systems, but I have not worked with these,
these were designed from the ground up with 'security' in mind.
But security is a tricky thing, I'v done my 'breaks' of security.
Even if the OS is 100% secure, for sure its users are not, neither
the peripherals, or the communications, or the whole organization
as for example GWB hired Osama, so how secure are you really with
all that secure stuff? It is used against you all the time.
Not only was the code written with security as the topmost
goal, the way the work was done had security as the topmost
goal.
mmmmm read sci.crypt for a couple of years, write an OS or
any *???secure?*** application, and wake up to the insecure world.
Microsoft needs to be split up!
Micsoft needs something. Splitting it up will cause
two viruses, protected by government, to exist instead of one.
That makes 3 viruses in case of your gov, multiplied by 10^200
over time, as the MS will set every port open for more.
OK, Microsoft needs to be split up, and Bush replaced by a suitable
human.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
26 Jul 2005 06:44:14 PM |
|
|
Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 25 Jul 05 08:41:27 GMT) it happened
wrote in <5o-dnQBM0fE5WHnfRVn-sQ@rcn.net>:
In article <sTUEe.117118$Qo.86307@fed1read01>,
"Richard Henry" <rphenry@home.com> wrote:
"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122233822.88cb6dba252b365f2fc9d2189aa32271@teranews...
<snip>
As for the problem, yes, Microsoft needs to be split for a better world
with
better quality software.
Split up Microsoft!
I agree.
Sigh! Do you really, really want politicians in Washington
to tell people how to code? Be very careful what you ask
for.
Do you belive in the American system, where free enterprise and
competition leads to a greater diversity, better quality, and lower
prices?
And a more powerful economy?
Having a monopolist player destroy that system is where politicians
can come in to protect.
Well, those rules work great will energy companies.
Since energy companies are the *only* companies
that have monopolies.
Microsoft is not one of moron Congress IT/EPA
Companies though. Which is why Bill Gate's
is rich and George Bush does the moron
book-keeping for Rupert Murdoch and Australia.
It is exactly because of this that there are rules the game has to be played
by.
The game changes constantly, so the rules need to be adapted from time to time.
It was done with AT&T, and really, IT has taken of big time since then,
it can also be done with MS.
I hope I also replied with this to you other post with the same gist.
Split up Microsoft!
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a new name in book of life |
26 Jul 2005 10:25:49 PM |
|
|
Bill Gates is now in the book of life at the gates of heven.
It dont say why.
MAYBE he has taken 22 BILLION bucks off the hands of the well to do
,,and gave it to the poorest on te planet.
IF thats why ,,then I hope he robs all you fuckers.
BILL DONT nead your blessing.
BILL has GODS blessing.
Now pay bill for your gates.
.
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a new name in book of life |
27 Jul 2005 05:36:32 AM |
|
|
"tj Frazir" <GravityPhysics@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:13523-42E6FEBD-1172@storefull-3215.bay.webtv.net...
gibberish
Idiot. You don't know any physics so you post your crap here constantly.
Foolish retarded moron.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a new name in book of life |
26 Jul 2005 10:44:28 PM |
|
|
tj Frazir wrote:
Bill Gates is now in the book of life at the gates of heven.
It dont say why.
MAYBE he has taken 22 BILLION bucks off the hands of the well to do
,,and gave it to the poorest on te planet.
IF thats why ,,then I hope he robs all you fuckers.
BILL DONT nead your blessing.
BILL has GODS blessing.
Now pay bill for your gates.
Nyuck, Nyuck, Nyuck. Yeah right. Those are the famous last words
of his predecessor Dino-computers morons at The Ford Factory
in Greater Downtown Berlin.
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a new name in book of life |
26 Jul 2005 10:56:17 PM |
|
|
How much do you think Bill gave the poor ?
In billions ....
.
|
|
|
| User: "MorituriMax" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a new name in book of life |
27 Jul 2005 12:29:18 AM |
|
|
"tj Frazir" <GravityPhysics@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:13524-42E705E1-233@storefull-3215.bay.webtv.net...
How much do you think Bill gave the poor ?
In billions ....
Well if he gave a billion more than you have to your name, he'd have given
maybe a billion dollars..
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a new name in book of life |
27 Jul 2005 08:26:47 AM |
|
|
tj Frazir wrote:
How much do you think Bill gave the poor ?
In billions ....
I don't think Bill gate a damn thing to the poor.
I think Ronny Reagan gave Bill a standard issue
GI Joe US Government cheese contract for
retarded McFonald's Boston Lawyer LLD LTD of
the Quantum Fart of Greater Miami Beach.
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a new name in book of life |
27 Jul 2005 10:46:18 AM |
|
|
try 22 BILLION .
He had near 50 billion.
this year he gave 7 billion.
BILL dont make the laws and dont make the rules. BILL plays by the
rules.
IF you dont like it ..***** you.
Bill dont answer to you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a new name in book of life |
27 Jul 2005 03:29:47 PM |
|
|
"tj Frazir" <GravityPhysics@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:11179-42E7AC4A-9@storefull-3218.bay.webtv.net...
boring stuff
Hey, here is a serious question for you. Why do you feel the need to come
here and pretend to be something you aren't?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a new name in book of life |
27 Jul 2005 11:06:07 AM |
|
|
tj Frazir wrote:
try 22 BILLION .
If Bill Gate's had 22 billion dollars, he
would be called a genius, rather than a Walton
trailer hitch.
He had near 50 billion.
this year he gave 7 billion.
BILL dont make the laws and dont make the rules. BILL plays by the
rules.
IF you dont like it ..***** you.
Bill dont answer to you.
Bill doesn't answer to anybody, that's why
he works in San Franciso, rather than
a real city.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
25 Jul 2005 03:44:04 AM |
|
|
In article <1122233822.88cb6dba252b365f2fc9d2189aa32271@teranews>,
Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
<snip>
As for the problem, yes, Microsoft needs to be split
for a better world with better quality software.
That is NOT how one gets quality in software.
/BAH
Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
24 Jul 2005 01:29:30 PM |
|
|
Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:41:42 -0700) it happened "Richard Henry"
<rphenry@home.com> wrote in <spQEe.115073$Qo.11277@fed1read01>:
Which one (or more) of the 25 claims would
patent the use of ";-)" or ":-(" in email, usenet , or on-line documents?
You are aware I am sure that 'characters' (like ';', '-', and ')' ARE drawn
on the screen as bitmaps ALWAYS?
For this there exist systems like true type font etc...
If the characters are read from ROM or some other memory makes no difference,
it is the (in your question the ASCII) code transmitted that selects these.
Look also at point 6.
It says basically: send ';-)' first, then follow up with the bitmap.
In point 21 they try to patent sending ANY picture.
The term 'character sequence' is fuzzy too, as you know we always send
'bytes' and in C those may be presented by the type 'character'.
Signed or unsigned 8 bits char comes to mind.
If that is a problem (from a legal point of view), then they have at least
covered all HEX transmissions of picture data!
And hex transmission of picture data (via text only channels) is for
example how we send MIMI type attachments via email and usenet.
I can go on and on, the patent is really TOO stupid, it should never have
been accepted for evaluation even.
We need to split up this Microsoft club, as was done with AT&T.
It's because of AT&T they can't spilt it up.
Since just like California's idiot Sun Oil Company,
they waited 50 years to long to split it up.
Since by the time they got around to splitting
up the moron AT&T electronics, the only
thing they owned were vegative and rotting adverizement
space in Los Angelos retard movies.
Which they did the correct thing with and gave
them to Washington, since they're the
only idiots who would even want
moron movie space.
Then the OS will get fair completion, and so will the applications.
Prices will come down, and quality will go up.
better safety for the US too, as when Bill Gates and or Balmer dies, that
Microsoft may collapse in a short time.
It is better to have many specialized companies competing.
Split it up!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: AT&T |
24 Jul 2005 10:37:23 PM |
|
|
Jan Panteltje wrote:
[sniped]
We need to split up this Microsoft club, as was done with AT&T.
Then the OS will get fair completion, and so will the applications.
Prices will come down, and quality will go up.
Jan--
They made the same claim for splitting up AT&T (but you don't use AT&T
do you!)--rates tripled with no improvement in quality. Jan, "your
fired"--#$%##, darn, Trump has the copyright on that phrase--sorry
Donald.;-))
Tut
[sniped]
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Math Freak" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill Gates, a thieve and fraud: Microsoft patents emoticons |
24 Jul 2005 03:29:15 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 18:17:53 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Prices will come down, and quality will go up.
And what would that do. Is it the price of such
products that keeps people from using them effectively?
Heh. You know, this bull is similar to the other one
you guys have for the price of gas.
If it is very high for you, then use it efficiently.
--
"yaghinan badetAn nemiAyad bedAnid ke in marAseme
hajj va ghorbAni che ma'ni dArad, mansha'e tArikhi
va ejtemA'iye An chist, cheguneh bargharAr shodeh
ast, che manzuri dar kAr budeh ast, va hAlA che
fAyede'i dArad, naghshe An dar Ayandeh che khAhad
bud."
- Mehdi Bazargan
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
