Adobe Reader lossage
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Rowland McDonnell on 26 Apr 2010 15:25 Bernard Peek <bap(a)shrdlu.com> wrote: > Tim Streater wrote: > > >> If you are a creative person who does not mind being forced to give away > >> all your rights to all your ideas, not just the ones you come up with on > >> the firm's time and for the firm's projects, I'm sure that's acceptable > >> to you. > >> > >> But some of us think that it's grossly unjust for a firm to claim such > >> ownership. > > > > No different in any other comparable company, I would have thought. > > The law on this is pretty complex. In the UK the default situation is > that intellectual property that you create in the course of your > employment is owned by the employer unless there is a specific clause > saying otherwise. The gross injustice is the situation where your employer claims ownership of all your ideas, including those you come up with in your own time. [snip] Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Rowland McDonnell on 26 Apr 2010 15:37 D.M. Procida <real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote: > zoara <me18(a)privacy.net> wrote: > > > D.M. Procida <real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote: > > > > No, Google is the new Microsoft. In a way, Google is really the new > > > IBM, except that when Microsoft used to be the new IBM, it did it so > > > much that people stopped remembering what the IBM was. Now Microsoft is > > > starting to become what the actual IBM became after Microsoft became > > > the new IBM, but people still remember it. > > > > So what's the new Google? > > Perhaps it's Apple. Nah. Google's a 20th century invention. Apple's an old-tyme 20th century invention - The Steve's still basically a hippy (although a rampantly capitalist neo-fascist hippy with tendencies to megalomania). Whatever `the new Google' is going to be, it'll be different, radically so. I don't think any of us old fogies here will recognize it until it's come to prominence. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Rowland McDonnell on 26 Apr 2010 15:37 D.M. Procida <real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote: > Pd <peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid> wrote: > > > D.M. Procida <real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > No, Google is the new Microsoft. In a way, Google is really the new IBM, > > > except that when Microsoft used to be the new IBM, it did it so much > > > that people stopped remembering what the IBM was. Now Microsoft is > > > starting to become what the actual IBM became after Microsoft became the > > > new IBM, but people still remember it. > > > > As an analogy, that fails in so many ways. The sort-of similarity is > > that Google is as ubiquitous as a search engine as Microsoft was as a > > personal computer operating system. > > ... and the fact now Apple and Google now square up for dominance over > technology in the way Apple and Microsoft did, Really? I don't see it. Where's the Apple-search-engine-driving-ad-revenue? Nowhere. Where's the Google-ecosystem-driving-the-sales-of-Google-made-hardware? Nowhere. So, erm? 'cos that's the basis of the two firms: Google does stuff to drive ad revenue; Apple does stuff to drive sales of Apple hardware. The fact that the two firms have radically different `bottom line ways of making money' implies to me that they're not competing like MS and Apple did. The thing about the MS-Apple fight is that MS was trying to destroy all competing OSes. Apple was just trying to survive in the face of that attack, and did despite the fact that almost all other PC platforms became moribund if not extinct during the period of MS's stranglehold. Google's not trying to wipe out the competition, nor's Apple. > with directly competing > products, Google is an advertising firm driving ad revenue with in-house software-and-services; Apple makes its money from hardware sales, also driven by in-house development of software and all the rest of it. So where's the direct competition? I don't see it. [snip] > > I think the single biggest difference is that Google actually innovate, > > and seem to care about that elusive quality "quality". Google Wave and > > Buzz suck though. They are the Zune of Google. > > > > Another similarity is that neither of them really give a toss about > > users as individuals with their silly personal desires for privacy and > > control. > > Keep going. Apple seems to me to be marginally less bad on the privacy front than Google. I do not trust either of 'em. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Woody on 26 Apr 2010 16:16 Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > D.M. Procida <real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote: > > > Pd <peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid> wrote: > > > > > D.M. Procida <real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > > > No, Google is the new Microsoft. In a way, Google is really the new IBM, > > > > except that when Microsoft used to be the new IBM, it did it so much > > > > that people stopped remembering what the IBM was. Now Microsoft is > > > > starting to become what the actual IBM became after Microsoft became the > > > > new IBM, but people still remember it. > > > > > > As an analogy, that fails in so many ways. The sort-of similarity is > > > that Google is as ubiquitous as a search engine as Microsoft was as a > > > personal computer operating system. > > > > ... and the fact now Apple and Google now square up for dominance over > > technology in the way Apple and Microsoft did, > > Really? I don't see it. > > Where's the Apple-search-engine-driving-ad-revenue? Its actually iPhone driving ad revenue at the moment: <http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/08/apple-announces-iad-mobile-advertising -platform/> > Nowhere. > > Where's the Google-ecosystem-driving-the-sales-of-Google-made-hardware? <http://www.google.com/mobile/navigation/> -- Woody www.alienrat.com
From: zoara on 26 Apr 2010 17:39
Bruce Horrocks <07.013(a)scorecrow.com> wrote: > A friend of mine, years ago when leaving university, refused to work > for British Aerospace (as they were then) and went for some firm whose > name I've since forgotten. After a while his employers were bought out > by someone larger, and then again, and then again until, eventually, > after having worked for six different companies without ever moving > desk, they were eventually bought out by BAe. At which point he > resigned. :-) > I like that story... -z- -- email: nettid1 at fastmail dot fm |