The Great Double Standard

Apple doesn't brick phones. Bricking is turning a phone into something useless (i.e. just a 'brick' of plastic) with no use whatsoever (permanently).

All Apple does is restore the phone with the original OS. Now if your phone wasn't on AT&T (because you hacked it), your phone _service_ won't work (unless you get AT&T), but the phone itself isn't 'bricked' and works fine. You'd have to hack it again. This is far from bricking.

Get your terminology right.

Great points, Joe. I think you also have to blame Ballmer's blustering grandstanding and Microsoft's public behavior (the ISO fiasco, SCO, repeated RICO threats against open source, updated Windows without users' permission) for a good deal of Microsoft's public perception.

When you have former Microsoft fanboys like myself declaring Freedom from Microsoft Day!, then the company has persistently done the wrong thing. Apple has lost fans, too, but it's a very thing. But from the perspective of a user, Microsoft does not have my interests at heart.

Thanks Joe for boldly taking up this subject which most of the people would hesitiate to look in to. Microsoft's customer friendliness can already be seen with the way Zune 1.0 customers are treated. It also shows how ahead they're planning with a software development project eventhough it's a new domain (music) for them. If more bloggers like Joe chose to link the tech blogs with the moral aspects like helping underdeveloped nations with these technologies, the world would be a much better place.Hats off for the new effort.

Accurate. Although in fairness, AAPL's success has also been supported by financial results not just perception.

Tom, you're splitting hairs. Apple were bricking peoples phones. That is the terminology that was being banded and that is the term that is in common usage to explain what happens when you update an iPhone that has been altered. Obviously the update did not turn the iPhone into an actual brick and is absurd to even suggest that is what Joe meant.

I can point you to myriad of different blogs that all use the same expression. It use who is out of touch with what the phrase means in the context of the iPhone, not Joe.

Apple have to sell the iPhone in Europe, especially France, sim free. That is the phone can be connected to ANY network you wish. This is because Apple chose to ignore the rules when marketing its product in Europe.

And rest assured that any further updates will NOT be bricking iPhones that have been UNLOCKED to go on any network. At least not in Europe they won't. That is, unless they want to go to court and be sued for it.

Nice try Tom, nice try.

The market is penalizing the gorilla for its lack of creativity and also for the huge legal liabilities it brings upon itself when it breaks the law; and even for the enmity it generates for merely doing things in unethical ways. Also for its bad taste.

The black cloud is well-earned.

Likewise, you can say Apple gets a creativity premium.

But there is no comparison.

Great Article, although Apple fans are few but loud, Microsoft fans are many but silent. How many Billions has Bill Gates been giving out to help third world countries compared to Steve Jobs philanthropy. (They also bailed out Apple in the 90's. Also, Bill was never investigated for backdating stock options but you don't hear that anywhere.

Joe,
I would say that the fact that M$ is making more money now than before is "not the right fact to look at."

Sure, they are making more money, but from a market share that is starting to shrink. Which means that M$ is turning the screws and figured out how to extract more money per user or company than it has before. This alone, would cause greater migration to other Operating System and Office Suites, later on.

So the key to focus on is, Vista causing MS to lose Market Share. Mac is perceived by many as a way to escape buying a Vista computer. And while I would agree that Mac OSX is clearly a better OS than Vi$ta, its an expensive way to go when there are very good free Linux alternatives.

I read your column on a regular basis as I do a tremendous number of blogs. I also have a very long history working with Microsoft and Apple along with a number of other UNIX vendors. I find your editorial laughable and one sided. Both Apple and Microsoft are for-profit companies in very different businesses. Microsoft has always approached the computer market from the Enterprise down to consumer while Apple -- despite many attempts -- is today a consumer company trying to legitimize their business into the Enterprise. Comparing their presence, brand, profitability, business model and looking for "fairness" is ridiculous. You are looking for a fight and I will not stoop to that level. Comparing stock price for example is also ludicrous. Microsoft has provided a dividend to their shareholders which makes them an income stock like GE. Apple is a growth stock. I would also suggest that there are far more Microsoft shares on the market so small movements have a much greater impact on stock valuations. Microsoft PCs are on everyone's desks while Apple's are on 4%. Apple couldn't get a decent software or hardware display at any retailer, Microsoft is present with knowledgeable technicians and salespeople at every retailer. Ultimately Apple was irrelevant ten years ago. Steve Jobs, love him or hate him, took the bull by the horns and created success despite the entire world being all about Windows. Criticize all you want but ultimately success breeds contempt. Bill Gates is the world's richest person and he is vilified. Bill Gates is also the personification of Microsoft and the Company needs to live with that. Your sanctimonious tirade aside, in ten years I see you making the same statement about an unknown Company versus Apple. And that beat will go on...

Bear, are you being sarcastic with the following comment.

"Microsoft is present with knowledgeable technicians and salespeople at every retailer"

I know of a few retailers, big ones, in the UK that have anything but knowledgeable technicians and salespeople at every retailer. This is a joke comment, right?

Finally, a breath of fresh air. Now if eweek would start posting the authors under the titles of the articles, I'd be really happy. I'm tired of trying to figure out which articles SJVN has written based on the title. He's such a Microsoft hater, it's unbelievable. Even his review of Leopard (which I accidentally read thinking it was an actual review) was anti-Microsoft.

Let's just say that Ballmer's blustering threats and grandstanding doesn't help the image of Microsoft.

Consider me a new Joe Wilcox fan. As long as the pieces are FAIR, I'm a happy reader. Its FAR too easy to simply find fault with a company. Its much more compelling writing, to provide CONTEXT, COMPARISON, and a fair-handed treatment.

Thanks Joe.

I think this articule brings out many great facts about Microsoft. I tend to forget the many good things Microsoft have done.
The world is acting like they are in high school - siding with the latest cool kids at school (apple & google) and step on the others. People are not objective and choose to ignore facts. The Apple fanatics in the above comments, choose to ignore the other facts and pigeon hole on one small tiny terminology. These people are like the old Britney Spear fans, acting childish and contribute nothing to society.
I use both Vista and OS X, and find pros and cons in both product in different situation. But I do agree with Bear, that Microsoft had become more Enterprise focused, while Apple is more consumer focused - and both company are trying to balance both market segment. It's great market dynamics, that will benefit us all.

Microsoft Update Brings Thousands of PCs to Standstill

http://www.macobserver.com/article/2007/10/25.10.shtml

Quote from the link: "Microsoft installed a resource hungry search application on thousands of PCs Wednesday, bringing them to a standstill"

The Wall Street enthusiasm for Apple is easy to explain: the company has weaned itself off its dependency on the Macintosh, and has another major, and faster growing, earner in the form of its iPod/iPhone business.

Microsoft, on the other hand, remains bound to its Dimdows/Office business. The recent small spot of black ink in the XBox business has done little to change the fact that everything else that Microsoft does, apart from Dimdows/Office, makes little or no money.

@William. I wasn't referring to it as physically turning into something. Wow. Whoever is complaining about "bricking" my phone are just zealots trying to bitch about something.

If you hack a firmware's device and then upgrade the damn thing, then bitch because the update reset what you did. That's just silly...

That was my whole freakin' point. Someone starts complaining that my iphone was "bricked". Then reporters like this guy starts saying "Oh my god, Apple is bricking iphones". When neither one knows what bricking actually means.

From Wikipedia- Brick - slang. When used in reference to electronics, "brick" describes a device that cannot function in any capacity (such as a machine with damaged firmware).

The key word there is _any_. OK.

Man, this Lawrence D'Oliveiro guy is an idiot. Do you know Microsoft has a business call "Servers" that is make a boat load of money?
SQL Server, Exchange server, Sharepoint Server, System Center and many more... Each one of these product are at least a billion dollar by themselves independently and this doesn't even count the Windows server.

Joe,

If you can't see that iBricking is an incidental consequence of the legal updating by Apple of iPhones belonging to users who have broken their contract, then you have no knowledge of the law.

Next time soup up your brand new car anyway you like and take it back to the dealership for an exchange for a new car. They'll tell where to go.

I've dealt with customers who will swindle you by planting doubt in your mind. The best example is a customer claiming that they left a $20 bill on your counter, and now it's gone. These iBrick whiners are no different.

Vista sales slow despite record MS profit

http://www.electronista.com/articles/07/10/26/vista.sales.rate.slowing/

Quotes from the link:

"The sales rate of Microsoft's Windows Vista is gradually slowing down as the operating system reaches the one-year anniversary of its release to businesses, according to the company's latest financial results. The Redmond, Washington-based company shipped approximately 28 million copies of Vista in the latest quarter ended September, or 9.3 million copies per month. Though the Windows developer pointed to 27 percent growth in business licenses and noted that many home users were buying the more lucrative Vista Home Premium or Ultimate editions, the rate represents a decline from the 10 million per month reported early in summer. Shipments of the OS peaked in the first three months after its January release, when the company sold an average of 20 million copies per month thanks to a wave of early adopters and users waiting for Vista to replace older systems."
--------------------------------------------------
Most likely at least 1/4 of the computers sold with Vista on them are wiped and replaced with XP or some with Linux. So the numbers of Vista units sold, is not the same as the number of Vista computers used. Train wreck=Vi$ta

Vista sales rate cut in half

http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/05/15/vista.sales.halved/

Quote from the link: "Although heavily anticipated, Vista has been plagued by sporadic issues with missing drivers or incompatible software that have caused hesitation in some buyers"

Joe,

I think you've gone off on the deep end with your comparisons of Lennon and McCartney to Apple and Microsoft.

Most importantly, you make emphatic statements about the two songwriters which are at best debatable and, given the topic, at worst distracting.

They're really inflamatory (as if the subject of Apple/Microsoft isn't inflamatory enough). If I can't convince you of Lennon's brilliance and importance in your life then just consider that McCartney considered him his best writing partner and his equal talent-wise. That should help you feign a modicum of respect for Lennon. If McCartney read your diatribe, he'd come to his dear friends defense, I'm sure.

Microsoft Now Takes Blame for WSUS Update Error

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,138994-c,windows/article.html

Quotes from the link:

"On the same day it tried to refute reports that enterprise customers' PCs were being force-fed the Windows XP desktop search tool, Microsoft Corp. did a turnabout and admitted it had messed up.

Some system administrators, however, were still not convinced that the company is telling a straight story."
--------------------------------------------------
NOT ANOTHER MS auto update problem! Well, I guess its not your computer, if you read the EULA from MS.

Chips,
Can you please stop using outdated & biased Macs article to pollute the comment section?

Every news article (except the ones written by Macs fanatics like you) points to strong growth across every market segments that Microsoft dominates. When Vista SP1 releases, the consumer sector will grow even more - just like every other Windows sales cycle.

Although VCSY is under 2 cents per share, I SURE don't want you buying VCSY if you don't understand what you're buying. That's why I try to explain this kind of thing to you - so you'll understand what's going on and why you need to pay attention.

Those who ridicule it all can't defend their technology positions and they can't explain why Microsoft can't deliver on things they've supposed to been able to do for five years. But what the hey?

So for people to tell people this stock will be "40" without offering a reason why beyond the same lame answers folks have been trying for years just to get it to stay sideways instead of caving is just disingenuous or ignorant.

There is no way Microsoft is going to be able to capitalize Facebook if they're going to try to do it based on the kinds of technology they've been trying to ship the last three years it's simply not going to fly. You need a whole new paradigm of technology to blend AdCenter, aQuantive Atlas, and the Facebook platform together to work in a managed ecology.

But the brokers and the traders won't tell you that because they don't know what any of that means and the journalists have been blowing BS all along because they won't face the technology gap questions. Why? Vested interests and editors who don't want to piss off the big money advertisers so you lowly readers don't get the story.

Don't blame me. I'm just telling you what the deal is and there's a whole $#!@load of "posters" who have a vested interest in laughing it off.

Laugh laugh laugh. Meanwhile you got 4 times the average volume and the shareprice goes UP? Heck no! It goes down and you're LUCKY if is stays sideways.

Enjoy your puts and calls because going sideways does you no good at all.

Joe wrote " If someone passes gas in the room, someone blames Microsoft. "

Joe , I think you and your eWeek colleague, Mr
Steven J. Vaughan Nichols blames Microsoft most

Joe , you need to swallow your own words : " Perception often isn't reality"

You have yet get Leopard tested but you had already put high hope that Leopard might not live up to its expectation . All these hopes are only perception and imagination , not being analayise objectively.

Again , Perception often isn't reality

I hope you do some soul searching on your analytical skill

Joe writes: "which has a reputation for secrecy and being partner unfriendly"

Nike, AT&T, Starbucks, the car makers, the media companies. Doesn't seem Apple is that partner unfriendly to me.

Joe Wilcox,
This is a surprising article, given your trend of blaming Microsoft and Microsoft products, but it accurately reflects perceptions in the industry the last few years. This unfair critism, which is summed up in ...everything Microsoft does is wrong, bad and monopolistic, while anything others do is good and inovative...has sometimes pushed me from being a moderate Microsoft supporter to being a passionate fan. I can't stand the free ride, Apple, Google and the rest of the firms are getting from the media...

Note:Considers Microsoft numbers this last quarter, I have said in the past about WGA,that I don't like it, but it would be pretty damn effective in reducing piracy. I was right.

my guess is that joe wilcox will continue his unfair microsoft rants and favorable-above-reality apple and google praises. He will simply point to this article for the next 6 months as PROOF POSITIVE that he is fair and balanced in his reporting.

Watch and see if I'm not right.

Micro$oft is its own worst enemy. It just doesn't make a few boneheaded decisions, it even plays them up! Just look at Ballmer's Linux patent bluster. Micro$oft already nearly sank its attack dog, SCO. Now it wants someone else to take the fall so it can continue its FUD campaign.

The M$ fanboys are all agog now that Joe has written some nice words about the convicted software pirate company in Redmond. In a few weeks they'll all be bellyaching about Joen not writing enough mindless praise for their idol.

Hilarious.

Maddog Says:
The M$ fanboys are all agog now that Joe has written some nice words about the convicted software pirate company in Redmond. In a few weeks they'll all be bellyaching about Joen not writing enough mindless praise for their idol.

@ Maddog:
Joe just threw'em a bone.

To answer Joe's question,
I would have to ask a question. Would you have 'double standards' if a convicted 'petafile' move next door and want to take your kids to Chuckie - Cheese?

Quoting Joe Wilcox:
"Apple it seems can do no wrong, while Microsoft can do no right. If someone passes gas in the room, someone blames Microsoft."
----------------------------------------------------
Apple can do wrong, and properly will. The DRM in Vi$ta was put there supposedly for the purpose of being able to playback Blueray and Toshiba HDDVD movies, although, the truth be known, it does a whole lot more than that, and none of it nice either.

What surprized me at Apple Leopard, is that the blueray/HDDVD DRM was not included, yet. Make no mistake, for those who are trying to avoid the DRM hell of Vista, moving to Mac OSX, is only delaying that for now. Mac will certainly get it in time, although, I think Mac is smarter to wait and see if there is a winner, or a demand for these new players, before saddling down their OSX will this DRM. DRM is the base for a lot of the performance problems and stability problems in Vista. As well as compatiablity of software problems in Vista.

Linux will not have this DRM. What does this mean for Linux? Its means a faster leaner meaner OS, than the other two. Does it mean that Linux might not play blueray or hddvd? Yes, but only short term. Someone WILL crack it over in europe, or somewhere else, and the files will be available on some server all over the world to enable Linux to play these titles, at some point not far off. And they will just play without the performance problems of the other two OS, Vista and OSX (should OSX go down the DRM route). Will it be legal? Maybe not, but folks will use it. That is the bottom line. Heck, DRM has already been cracked on Windows machines. The only reason it has not been done on Linux so far is that these formats are not that popular yet. And, may never be, just like the lazerdisk.

@Joe:

In your 1016 words, no where was the word 'MONOPOLY' mentioned once. Then you concluded with: "The perception: When Microsoft competes, it cheats."

Monopoly and compete is an oxymoron.

Hence, your article reads like an apologist.

Microsoft or eWeek must have ping you, eh?

Tom, thanks for your little rant. The rest of the population will continue to use the phrase "bricking" the iPhone. English is not a language set in stone, it is flexible and in a constant state of flux. What is terminology if not technical slang. ????

Perhaps Latin would be more down your street?

Joe, if I'm not mistaken, you were one of the people who bashed Vista and referred to it as Windows Me II. I said the same thing then that I'll say now: Vista is a much better operating system than it gets credit for. The last couple of reliability and performance fixes have actually made a lot of difference (at least for me).
I'm actually surprised by this article. But at least when you give credit where it's due, you don't come across as biased when you actually criticize the company.

reflections wrote: "Joe, if I'm not mistaken, you were one of the people who bashed Vista and referred to it as Windows Me II."

I said: "The Inquirer has labeled Windows Vista as Windows Me II. I wouldn't go that far (yet)."

As I've said before, Reflections, the Windows Vista experience is broken. The reasons are varied and not necessarily all Microsoft's blame. Good examples: OEMs shipping low-powered graphics, or manufacturers failing to deliver updated drivers.

I'm not biased against Microsoft or Vista. Microsoft isn't the only one with perception problems. :)

Joe

"Microsoft isn't the only one with perception problems. :)"

Nice one! :-)

Even though I consider that part of what you're saying is truth, you're forgetting a couple of details (which could explain the attitude of the clients)
-Apple learnt its lesson a long time ago. And it was hard to do so. Now, it is the head of what we could consider to be "fashion PC designers" If you want to be part of the fashion world, that is your problem and your money. But customer service is generally honest and frank.
-Apple has not gotten the duties that Ms got when it became "king of the hill", when you get to the top, you get both rights and duties. Ms only thinks on ITS own rights (and beyond them if possible.) And that has its price (remember IBM and old Apple?)

UK government: Schools shouldn't sign licensing agreements with Microsoft

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071026-uk-government-schools-shouldnt-sign-licensing-agreements-with-microsoft.html

Quote: "Concerns over Microsoft's Office 2007 and Vista licensing terms have prompted a UK government agency to warn schools against signing licensing agreements. Becta, the UK's education technology branch, has also filed a complaint with the UK's Office of Fair Trading, alleging that Microsoft engages in anticompetitive practices in the academic software license marketplace."
-----------------------------------------------------
Governments and Schools around the world could save their taxpayers a ton of money but just saying no to Micro$oft and using community Linux. Not only that but they would not have the virus problems of M$ Windows to deal with either. Russia is already going to move to Linux in all their school systems.

Completely true

http://www.apcstart.com/3895/how_vista_screws_dual_booting_nirvana
Quote:

"If Dar/wine were mature enough to allow OS X and Linux users to run absolutely any Win32 application, Microsoft would be finished. Kaput.

Take note, Redmond; the goodwill is gone. People use your software because they have to, not because they want to, and all the aero glass in the world won't change that. Every time you make a decision like this in designing your software, God kills a Windows PC I maintain.

And every time one dies, it gets reborn as a SuSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10 machine, or an Ubuntu machine, meaning that they become emissaries of change.

And, yes, I do have Vista machines here too - it's a frigging PC magazine. Users generally come away from an experience with them confused and disoriented. If that was your aim, good job

Marco
"And every time one dies, it gets reborn as a SuSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10 machine, or an Ubuntu machine, meaning that they become emissaries of change."
You are living in la la land !!

"Microsoft's Double(Click) Standard"

"Talk about the pot calling the kettle black, Microsoft sure has nerve to hire a lobbying firm to get congress to look into the Google-DoubleClick merger. The ink isn't even dry on Microsoft's acquisition of aQuantive!"

@joe:
Your article was fair but not balance.

Adobe AIR and Flex becoming such a powerful force in so many companies so quickly. The patents aren't software. They're a way to write the software and the Adobe AIR/Flex looks just like the VCSY MLE/Emily claims. So how do you explain that? Is Adobe stealing the patent rights?

Look how many companies are using AIR.
http://labs.adobe.com/showcase/air/?promoid=BKGAP

Looks like your going to run out of complaints before long, "long".

Microsoft bought 1.6% of Facebook for $240 Million. One and six tenths of a percent. Microsoft paid many times the going rate for that 1.6%. Slick business move. I guess the only way Microsoft can get somebody to play with them is to throw money. Throw lots of money. It's like tying a pork chop around your neck to get the dog to like you.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/25/technology/24cnd-facebook.html?ex=1350964800&en=c27e6c86844c7723&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
The Microsoft investment throws the value of the holdings of Facebook investors into the stratosphere. Mark Zuckerberg, the 23-year-old Facebook founder who dropped out of Harvard to build the company, owns a 20 percent share which is now valued at $3 billion. Accel Partners, the venture capital firm that invested $12.7 million in May 2005 and owns 11 percent of Facebook, now holds stock worth $1.65 billion.

Since those bastards encrypted the iPod firmware to block Linux users, I have not bought a single Apple product. Ever again. The latest iPhone brickings are just another example of a company on a power trip with no signs of slowing down.

Trust me, Apple can do wrong. And telling its users, "We own your products," is far more wrong than anything Microsoft has done.

And I'm no Microsoft fan here. I'm running Ubuntu on most of my systems, Fedora on my server and only Windows XP on the media center. But I gotta say, I very nearly switched over to XP when Office 2007 came out. (The only reason I didn't is that XPP failed to support my resolution correctly, and with neither '1280x800' in my dropdown list, nor an xorg.conf of sorts to hack, I was lost.)

Microsoft can do right. Vista is perhaps not a great example, but Office 2007 is. Though, please, drop your silly broken format and just use ODF.

great article ... hope joe has not written this only to change his image ???

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=201339

Vertical Computer Systems Inc (BB: VCSY)
By: morrie33
28 Oct 2007, 02:24 PM EDT
Msg. 201339 of 201339

Response to kantuc 201321

Morrie,

Responding to post 201321. Sorry this is so wordy. I did it on an empty stomach and I'm in a hurry to get to the bacon place. I haven't tried to refine this into less involved language.

To Wit:

The SiteFlash? Technology

One of the things that has baffled me about the 744 patent, is that this key concept - separating content from functionality - doesn't seem like something that would be, in itself, patentable.

(Portuno: Nevertheless it is patented so get over the "mystery". What is patented is the separation of content from format from functionality - the three basic components of any information presentation separated from each other.)

(Portuno: Content is the information to be presented. That can be words or numbers or pictures or sound.)

(Portuno: Format is the way in which the content may be presented. That can mean fitting the content into a native page [belonging to the content owner's working area] or fitting that content and format into somebody else's "page" format.)

(Portuno: Functionality is the way in which the content and format assembly are applied within a workflow. That is what makes a graphic presentation an application. The way any application works sits below or behind content presented in a format.)

(Portuno: Keeping each of those three separated allows any work to be done on each area by workers who are not involved in the work of other workers. The content provider has a resource chart to map out where that information comes from and how it is supported. The format designer has a style map to demonstrate where the information is presented. The functionality builder uses a flow chart to demonstrate where the formatted content will be handled. )

I've been writing software for 25 years, and the idea of separating content from function was always just common sense, long before the internet even existed.

(Portuno: Congratulations. You at least acknowledge the need. Now, show us how content format and function were actually separated in development environments. If a programmer was required to work each class into the application, they aren't "separated". They are "integrated". The only "separation" workers actually see in programming are the natural partitioning qualities of each information workset. The key to understanding the importance of compartmentation of content, format and functionality is to see the existing traditional process as having to take the content and format out of the hands of information providers and look-and-feel designers and give it all into the necessary control of a programmer who understands how to manipulate the environment to build functionality. This lack of arbitrary use locks programmers into the process and excludes the true talent of information providers and style designers.)

That's where the whole idea of databases comes from. Data, or your content, is stored in a kind of bucket, the database. I usually often had no idea what the data meant. I would write computer programs that would read the data and do stuff with it, and write it out on some format.

(Portuno: "Format" in the programmer sense means the syntactic layout of data. That's only the first level of formatting. Actual "Format" has to do with presentation beyond data segmentation. Think look and feel. A programmer knows nothing about visual format or presentation because it's not needed. Format tools are provided for the programmer in the integrated development environement [IDE]. Format [look and feel] is the work of stylists and designers who work with visual composition, color, tone and viewer direction. The fact content and format were compartmentalized in content management software demonstrates the first step in taking the content beyond "data" out of the database boxes into a non-structured look and feel. When a programmer draws a flow chart to create the functionality in an application, does he need to paste an example of the content on the chart? Does he need to staple a style sheet to the chart? No. If the flow chart drawn represents functional components... does the programmer then need to mash the content and the look-and-feel together. No. It's the unsegmented nature of the IDE that forces the content format question into the programmer's hands while the information provider and designer can only look on and point.)

This was how a system functioned. Database administrators took care of managing the content. Separate system components dealt with content and function separately. This was an obvious way to design things. There were many ways to do it. Object oriented programming refined the idea further. Today you can use the XML standard to do it. The general idea is nothing new. I must assume that SiteFlash does this in some very unique way, if it is central to the patent, otherwise it just seems like one of many general design goals that have been part of IT application development since the beginning - and achieved to a varying degree, but nev completely.

(Portuno: "This was how a system functioned." and is the root cause of cost and inefficiency in modifying application constructs. "Database administrators took care of managing the content." Again, a "database" is essentially a content body trapped by a formatting construct. "Content" is not just structured data. Unstructured data is a much larger body and the "database manager" hasn't a clue what to do with presenting that. Those who understand information flow rather than relationship construction are the new "data" managers. Who wrote the copy? Who provided the video and images? Who gave the non-relational datasets that a database can't structure? Nobody. They sat in a room with the programmer, told the programmer how they wanted the stuff put in and how they wanted it to look and feel and the programmer did the building. The SiteFlash arbitrary method says the copy providers, photographers, number crunchers can all put their content INTO THE APPLICATION BY THEMSELVES without interfering with the graphic designers who fashioned the look and feel of the application BY THEM SELVES WITHOUT DISTORTING THE FUNCTIONALITY and the business method engineer can determine the workflow and logic WITHOUT HAVING TO KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT HOW THE CONTENT OR FORMAT IS PROVIDED.)

(Portuno: "This was an obvious way to design things." Which is why traditional software construction hit a wall, stuck in an empire built by programmers and IT workers and never advanced to "obvious" flexibility and utility. Fortunate for us because McAuley wasn't a programmer. He was a magazine publisher who wanted to make applications out of his magazines. Get it?)

(Portuno: "I must assume that SiteFlash does this in some very unique way, if it is central to the patent, otherwise it just seems like one of many general design goals that have been part of IT application development since the beginning - and achieved to a varying degree, but nev completely. " Duhhhh...)

To me, it is not really possible to *completely* separate content from functionality or design. How could it be?

(Portuno: People who design newspapers and magazines and advertizing layouts are laughing at that statement. They consider functionality an entirely different realm while the programmer considers content and format inexorably locked to functionality. The programmer is wrong and content management software shows he's wrong.)

"content producers can focus on content without worrying about design or functionality.
Programmers can concentrate on functional development rather than content or design modifications.
Graphic designers can create style and appearance improvements without dealing with content or programming changes. "

Ok, I agree that there are advantages to isolating and managing design, content and programming separately. If SiteFlash does this well, that my hats off to it.

(Portuno: Damn. After all that I have to find you've convinced yourself your above statements are obsolete? It can and you can keep your hat off. The real impact of what SiteFlash can do hasn't sunk in yet.)

But there will always be some interdependencies. If the nature of nature of your content changes, then your design and functionality will have to accommodate them. Imagine a web site that one day wants to include video streaming. Perhaps there will be new unanticipated bandwidth needs, or the user's browser will have to be more up to date. A good design can anticipate such possibilities, but content is always evolving in unexpected ways, and anyway, it would be inefficient to have a design takes every conceivable possibility into consideration. Most apps are optimized to handle certain kinds of content.

(Portuno: "If the nature of nature of your content changes, then your design and functionality will have to accommodate them." Not if the content may be applied to ANY look and feel. Which is true. Not if ANY look and feel may apply to ANY functionality. Which is true. Show me where ANY content is dependant on a specific look and feel [remember "data" format is a narrow use of the term and is arbitrated using "typeless" handling] and where that dependancy is locked to any functionality. Not true. Content, format and functionality are inherently seperated and that is demonstrated by human charting methods. XML allows for virtualization of every element of data, metadata and code [content, format, function] to provide for an arbitration layer between each class to preserve the human distinctions.)

(Portuno: "A good design can anticipate such possibilities". Never. All the possible impacts can never be accounted for by designing a single construct. No integrated design can anticipate all possibilities. It's why we have versioning and updates. On the other hand, in a world where various disciplines have segregated command over different parts of the application, all the possible impacts are accounted for by the natural partioning between data, metadata and code. That's why the construct, the construction frame and the construction methods themselves must be virtualized. The "design" must allow for ANY possibility at ANY time. Traditional development can not provide that while virtualized work areas can.)

If your data contains information about itself (e.g. metadata) so that any system can use it, then you have, in effect, combined design and function with your content, so to me, that goes against the ideal of separate components.

(Portuno: You fundamentally misunderstand the employment of metadata. Metadata is first a body of content that allows the machine to employ the data. The data is the content. The metadata is the format. Thus format itself has its own content/form interdependancy that will be segmented by arbitration. Functionality is what you do TO the data. What is done to the data derives metadata to be applied to determine the formatting parameters. )

While "content producers" often do not worry about design or functionality, programmers always have to have *some* idea of the kind of content/data their code will be handling. I'd be amazed of SiteFlash has found a way to *completely* separate these components from one another, without being very limited in the kinds of applications it can build well.

(Portuno: "While "content producers" often do not worry about design or functionality, programmers always have to have *some* idea of the kind of content/data their code will be handling." Why? If virtualization can provide a buffer between each class of activity, why does one class have to know about how to handle the other classes? When you build a flow diagram, do you paste various content samples on the board and tape the way that information is formated to the diagram? I've never seen that kind of thing in a flow chart. If you have a content resource chart, do you have to show how that content is formatted to tell the content providers what their limits are? If a designer develops a style concept, does the designer have to stick in real examples of the content to make it understandable?)

These are just question i have about the patent claim, and SiteFlash. I have not worked with SiteFlash so I don't really know how it implements this part of pattent 744, which I always assumed was an impractical ideal - the kind of thing that sounds good on paper.

(Portuno: That's the entire problem of the "so obvious" crowd. They've never been able to understand how a native XML framework can take the way they work and make that work method available to anyone. That's why the "too obvious" and "too broad" claims simply won't work. People who made buggies used were unable to understand how you could replicate what a horse did.)

If Portuno was here, he would laugh at me and throw pages of buzzwords around to make me look stupid, even though my questions should be answerable with simple terminology. I doubt anyone else on this board has any idea how SiteFlash works, which is a shame. Most people here have little understanding of what they have invested in.

(Portuno: I'm not laughing. I'm angry such a class of worker bees like programmers hold businesses in such an inefficient grip for so long while the solutions should have been so "obvious". Did I use any "buzzwords" to dupe anyone?)

I couldn't agree more. Apple is getting away with practices that would make everyone scream murder with Microsoft. Bootcamp being required and time bombing with the release of Leopard. You know if Microsoft did that, everyone would scream foul. The Apple zealots, say ok, no big deal Apple never said it would be free.

Apple now limits iPhone sales to a quantity of 2 per person. They claim to avoid people who are unlocking the phone. UH HUH, sure. Profits, profits is what it is about. Apple orginally said it would neither try and fight unlockers or deliberatly attempt to create problems, but that is obviously untrue now as well.

Leopard is also based on a 6 year old OS, like XP is. Vista is a completely new re-write for the future. Apple gets people to pony up every couple of years for a few new features, but what is essentially a service pack. If Microsoft had charged for SP2, which really was a new OS, then people would have screamed bloody murder again.

Slow, bloated and can't copy large files. Those are the complaints. Three issues an Vista SUCKS. Are people having crashing issues, losing data? Those are severe issues. Application compatiblity? How old of a program are you using? It's to Microsoft's credit that as many apps worked as they did when Vista came out. They had been telling developers for years to rewrite apps, but no one listened. They finally changed the core for increased security, but the developers didn't want to change their apps and look what happens? Microsoft gets blamed. The developers now have a new revenue stream and tell people they must buy the newest one to work with Vista. Then application compatibility for Leopard is an issue. There are reported issues with it as well. Leopard SUCKS then. Even one blue screen on OSX is unacceptable in my opinion with Leopard, and there are reports flowing in of them. When they control the hardware and software, nothing, absolutely nothing should go wrong!

I'm waiting for them to say that I had sometime to do with it.

Heres a new one for you.
The "Blue Screen of Death" on a Mac !!

"The creators of APE on Saturday denied that their application-enhancement framework is responsible for blue-screening Macs being upgraded to Leopard. Apple Inc., however, blamed the software in a support document advising users to delete APE from their machines. Within hours of Leopard's Friday debut, users began reporting a "blue screen of death" that appeared after running the default Upgrade option. On affected Macs, the blue screen stymied the required restart after the install, locking users out of their computers.

The Installation and Setup forum on Apple's support site was quickly flooded with messages, including one that fingered Unsanity LLC's APE (Application Enhancer), software required to run Mac customizing haxies such as ShapeShifter, as the culprit. A user identified as Chris Mcculloh posted instructions on manually deleting APE using the Unix command line to kick the Mac through the restart. Others spread Mcculloh's instructions to new threads on the Apple forum, and reports of success poured in. "This fix seemed to work perfectly for me," said TuHolmes."

Now Chips, Marco, etc. go on about Vista but the above takes the cake, a default upgrade causes a BSOD, now lets see is said, or not said by the zealots.

@Michael Vick :

Hey, I don't have a dog in this fight. I don't use Mac or Windows.

It wasn't me, either!

I took the brick comment as something totally out of context that most all of the posts above refer to, such as: "sh*ting" instead of "bricking" phones. Just as well, I have had no problems w/my Vista. The only hemmroid to using the Office programs is in getting accustomed to the changed gui toolbar. I will always be a loyal MS consumer. Rock on Gates!

By: waitin-on-news
26 Oct 2007, 11:21 AM EDT
Msg. 158829 of 158862

Why, those dirty cheats, rheemer. Those dirty cheats in your view have suckered VCSY into working with them (IBM beginning in 2001 - Verizon sometime around 2006) so they could simply take their patent claims and build big business with them and then wait for VCSY to have to sue IBM and Verizon just as Microsoft took what VCSY was able to do from 2001 and built into .Net to show off MSFT capability in XML.

Well, Microsoft certainly looks a whole lot smarter than IBM and Verizon. Yessirree. Because right after the SiteFlash patent was granted in November 2004, you'll find Microsoft shut up abotu XML. Not a peep out of anything XML in Longhorn or Viridian or any other Microsoft development project in XML to this day. In fact, you can't even find XML mentioned in Microsoft marketspeak beyond simple editing tools and XML parsers and XML storage in their document and database files. No XML middleware. No XML-based ecosystem. Just... "something" that lets them come close but never quite deliver in the XML theory arena.

But IBM and Verizon, them dummies, they just push right along. And worse, IBM uses "Viper" as a codename for the very first project they developed that provided "vendor independent" capabilities in their traiditional proprietary database.

And Verizon makes a big hoorah about NOW Solutions as the first (and as far as we can tell, their ONLY SaaS platform base in their network center) and now we see Verizon advertising "SMART" network centers that seem to use the full promise of the 744 patent...

and you tell us that Microsoft has nothing to worry about as far as infringement but IBM and Verizon are crooks.

Well, that damn Wade must be plenty stupid to sue Microsoft who has "NOTHING" of VCSY patent claims while completely ignoring IBM and Verizon who show PLENTY of patent claim marketing.

And we haven't even talked about Adobe who uses what looks very much like the 521 patent claims to build AIR and then (arrogance of arrogances) codename it "Apollo". Now, the new reader can be excused for not knowing what Apollo means to a VCSY long of past years, but Apollo Industries used the 521 patent claims to build a distributed smartcard system and later changed from Apollo to "Transtar".

So what? Well, the 521 basis for a smartcard infrastructure would be excellent as a basic platform for an internet equivalent (no doubt the Apollo Smartcard system would be based on internet infrastructure as it's the most ubiquitous network). So, why would we not imagine Adobe snuggling up to VCSY over time (we see McAuley is an Adobe user and that is reasonable given his past as a magazing publisher), learning of the Apollo distributed system and, wonder of wonders, appropriating that sucker for their very own for use in web applications (the client is thus the smartcard many times over if necessary).

So, THAT's the kind of thing VCSY longs have to believe if we're to accept the view that you, tepe, kantuc, seeker, seebeamike and any others of the VCSY skeptics want the reader to accept.

BUT, if we simply accept that business strategies and tactics would allow for agreements and conditions and tactics that would allow VCSy to allow players like IBM and Verizon and Adobe to employ the patent claims to develop their technologies until such time as VCSy demands payment for the developed extents... well, those of us who've watched business lawyers at work are continuously amazed at the plastic nature of "numbers" and "agreements".

You, of course, would be depending on the view that all companies are crooks.

You believe that none can be trusted.

We, of course, would be depending on the view that not all companies are crooks.

We believe some can be trusted.

The best warrior is one who can turn circumstances to his advantage in a fight... and trust is a weapon.

When is anyone going to take Apple to task for coping the mutliple desktops feature from Linux? You know if Microsoft incorporated that, everyone would be screaming from the rafters.

Dreaded Blue Screen of Death mars some Leopard installs

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/27/leopard_install_problems/

Apple support drones are getting an earful from Mac users who are getting the dreaded Blue Screen of Death while trying to update to the latest and greatest version of OS X. A thread in Apple's official support forum titled Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen had more than 300 posts when this article was last updated. A large percentage of the writers report getting a persistent blue screen after installing Leopard and then rebooting for the first time. These early-adopters have no option but to forcibly shut the machine down.

Among the early signs that something was awry was the following post from a Mac user in Australia:

I've just been on the phone to Apple AU support for an hour (around half of that spent on hold, but on-and-off as they sometimes consulted other techs), and they definitely know of the BSOD issue, said they started taking calls from 9am Friday as the first (early courier!) deliveries of Leopard were installed, and they've been flat out, "phones ringing non-stop" since then. Implied that Apple stateside has been swamped (as you can imagine) and they haven't been able to pinpoint the issue causing the BSOD but "they're looking into it".
It's still not clear what's causing the snafu. Seems at least some of the the people experiencing problems had a third-party developer app called Application Enhancer installed. Some also had external disks or other peripherals attached when they pulled the trigger on the Leopard install. But plenty of people reporting problems swear they aren't in either category. Incompatibilities with DIVX Application Support and Tiger's RAID system may also be at play.

This MacFixIt article offers a succinct list of trouble-shooting tips.

The OS went on sale on Friday all over the world. Many users later reported they were able to successfully install, but it sure was a messy road to redemption.

To recover, users were instructed to rip Application Enhancement, made by a company called Unsanity, from the Leopard's maw. The process is too gory for us to print here, but suffice it to say that, among other things, it had users use a command line to purge files with names like "Enhancer.prefpane" and "com.unsanity.ape.plist." Another remedy being suggested is to use the OS X feature Archive and Install, rather than the default Upgrade method. Some users say they are still unable to load Leopard even after following all of the aforesaid instructions.

Apple PR reps didn't respond to a request to comment by time of writing. We'll be sure to update if they do.

El Reg is eager to publish screenshots or snapshots of the fatal install. We'd imagine Steve Jobs to come up with more of an Azure or Cobalt Blue shade. If you have shots, please contact the reporter here.

We can only hope the normally smug Mac Guy is duly red-faced. After all, aren't BSODs, botched installs and kludgy fixes the stuff of the inferior OS to Cupertino's North? Not that we don't look forward to updating to Leopard soon. But as was the case with users of the iPhone, we think it'd be better to hold off a little while, thank you very much. ®

Dreaded Blue Screen of Death mars some Leopard installs

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/27/leopard_install_problems/

Apple support drones are getting an earful from Mac users who are getting the dreaded Blue Screen of Death while trying to update to the latest and greatest version of OS X. A thread in Apple's official support forum titled Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen had more than 300 posts when this article was last updated. A large percentage of the writers report getting a persistent blue screen after installing Leopard and then rebooting for the first time. These early-adopters have no option but to forcibly shut the machine down.

Among the early signs that something was awry was the following post from a Mac user in Australia:

I've just been on the phone to Apple AU support for an hour (around half of that spent on hold, but on-and-off as they sometimes consulted other techs), and they definitely know of the BSOD issue, said they started taking calls from 9am Friday as the first (early courier!) deliveries of Leopard were installed, and they've been flat out, "phones ringing non-stop" since then. Implied that Apple stateside has been swamped (as you can imagine) and they haven't been able to pinpoint the issue causing the BSOD but "they're looking into it".
It's still not clear what's causing the snafu. Seems at least some of the the people experiencing problems had a third-party developer app called Application Enhancer installed. Some also had external disks or other peripherals attached when they pulled the trigger on the Leopard install. But plenty of people reporting problems swear they aren't in either category. Incompatibilities with DIVX Application Support and Tiger's RAID system may also be at play.

This MacFixIt article offers a succinct list of trouble-shooting tips.

The OS went on sale on Friday all over the world. Many users later reported they were able to successfully install, but it sure was a messy road to redemption.

To recover, users were instructed to rip Application Enhancement, made by a company called Unsanity, from the Leopard's maw. The process is too gory for us to print here, but suffice it to say that, among other things, it had users use a command line to purge files with names like "Enhancer.prefpane" and "com.unsanity.ape.plist." Another remedy being suggested is to use the OS X feature Archive and Install, rather than the default Upgrade method. Some users say they are still unable to load Leopard even after following all of the aforesaid instructions.

Apple PR reps didn't respond to a request to comment by time of writing. We'll be sure to update if they do.

El Reg is eager to publish screenshots or snapshots of the fatal install. We'd imagine Steve Jobs to come up with more of an Azure or Cobalt Blue shade. If you have shots, please contact the reporter here.

We can only hope the normally smug Mac Guy is duly red-faced. After all, aren't BSODs, botched installs and kludgy fixes the stuff of the inferior OS to Cupertino's North? Not that we don't look forward to updating to Leopard soon. But as was the case with users of the iPhone, we think it'd be better to hold off a little while, thank you very much. ®

BSOD, know where have I heard that one before, ah yes, Windows! Sure seen a lot of the Windows BSOD in my time.

BTW, I use Linux and Windows folks, and not too much Windows anymore. I do not use, or endose Mac OSX, as my personal opinion is, that while the Mac operating system is better than Windows, the hardware is too expensive. Even though one person and their sock puppets would like to paint me as a Mac zealot, I am not a Mac user.

Chips
You liar !!
You keep trying to make out like you are a honest person when you are not.
There have been lots of times here that you have endorsed Leopard.
And all the people who have going on about Windows Vista and saying Leopard was much better, can now eat their words !
By the way Chips your grammar is terrible..."BSOD, know where have I heard that one before" ... not "know" is should have been "now" !

Part of Joe's point could be that whenever Microsoft is successful, some people think its because they used evil monopoly tactics or cheated, and never did anything good. Microsoft might want to sell you that it never did anything bad, on the other hand. But the story is more complex, and Microsoft is not the Empire, Bill Gates is not Darth Vader, and OpenSource is not the Rebel Alliance.

Once we get that straight we can have a conversation of whats right and whats wrong with Microsoft.

Wow. What a nice fluffy article, completely unfocused on actual technology, and so nice to Microsoft.

Do you get paid to write this drivel ?

Why is Vista hated ? Its rubbish. DRM infested, irritating, counter-productive rubbish. 5 years wait for this ? The Vista reset (3 years, 10,000 developer years wasted, wasnt it?) for this?

Why has leopard got so much air-time ? Because its good.

[ This based on my personal experience. Two months beating my head against Vista, and the next laptop I bought was a MacBook pro. ]

Why support a monopoly company that has paid more in fines than big tobacco ?

And just look at CEO Ballmer for the most ridiculous, agressive posturing imaginable. Why dont you think people want to bet their pension on *him* ? Do you?

So perhaps once Microsoft grows up from this ridiculous posturing, and the quality code from the super-intelligent folk it hires shines through, then perhaps I'll look at them again. Till then, its a 'sell'.

---* Bill

i love this article, man. this rings so true in so many ways. i used to be one of those Apple fanboys back in the early 90s, until i started to look at how Apple treated me and others like me with their constant march of newer machines and newer software leading to the obsolescence of my purchases. it annoyed me but there was no way i was going to gripe publicly about it while trying to convince my friends that Apple was the way and everything else was a lie.

as time passed i realised how much nicer the Windows world was and how forgiving the operating systems were and how you could continue for a long time without having to upgrade your hardware. i still have the 233MHz 64MB RAM PC i used Windows 98 on that ran XP perfectly well (except when i fired up Photoshop of course). a scenario such as this was unheard of in the 90s with Apple machines.

my point here is Apple does all kinds of despicable shit and still can't do any wrong. for example: you buy QuickTime Pro 6, only to have Apple push an update that makes you have to buy another license. no way in hell to rollback to what you had before. if Microsoft did anything like this, it would not go unnoticed. heck, they'd be vilified and no one would ever hear the end of it.

i think Apple has a huge rude awakening in its future but only until the Kool-Aid is in effect.

Apple has a 'spotty' record on the environment? That's just Greenpeace drumming up some pub to get more donations. I'm sure you know the whole background of that story. No need to rehash here.

You forgot to mention the biggest contributor to Microsoft's bad rep: It's spotty CRIMINAL record.

Microsoft is disliked because of its abusive monopoly practices that has been confirmed by courts all over the world. It is a convicted abusive monopolist in the U.S. and Europe.

This is not all mere perception, mister.

Wow, some of the comments only prove how much the main story is true. Alot of your comments play right into that double-standard and your hypocricy is obvious.

Leopard is still OSX, an operating system that released ~6 years ago, which at that time was incompatable with alot of OS 9 apps and required people to dualboot. Leopard is OS X with a few bug patches and apps thrown on top. In the Windows world this would be called a service pack. Apple charges you for their service packs. Think about it.

LOL!

This article is hilarious. Wilcox is such a MS butt-kisser. He should be embarrassed to publish this.

The only decent point he makes is the one on the free laptops. The rest is laughable.

Lennon vs. McCartney?

Imagine vs. The frog chorus!

GOD Damn bloody MAC and Linux. You people are nothing but bloody lazy weeners. Worhtless crappy software. What the hell do you people know other than weaning at a successful person

Microsoft's huge earnings are due to a massive amount of hard work, over the years, building the 'Microsoft Stack'.

The Microsoft Stack is a formidable collection of state-of-the-art software tools, ranging from low level Operating Systems to high level Business Applications, with everything in between.

In particular, the .Net software development Platform has exceed all expectations. It has become the development platform of choice for millions of programmers, creating the next generation of applications.

The '.Net Army' (of developers) is still one of Microsoft's most valuable 'assets', and one which is hardly ever properly valued by the stock market!

Dude,
You got to understand where things are heading for the next generation. Microsoft is for professionals while Apple is for kiddies. You tell me, how many products are in use for Apple in the financial and other major industries (enterprise, so to speak) comparing to Microsoft.

Apple is all kiddies stuff for the families, kids, teens you know.....? That's the next generation dude! They'll be outsourcing for someone to make dinner, not because of cost, but how to.

Saif Khan

Some good points overshadowed by the author's obvious bitterness. When Windows guys whine about Apple users it's like a couple of years ago when you had a Republican Congress, a Republican President, basically a total Republican government, and all they did was complain about Democrats.

It's a Microsoft world. Apple represents change, and until change becomes the standard it's all about hope, hope that this product will be different than the old. And so far Apple IS doing things differently.

And that crap about Apple not having green products, Microsoft avoids this because they don't produce hardware. Why don't you examine Sony and Dell for their green record if you're examining accountability. It weakens his argument; that, and also Apple didn't brick phones, they were wiped and restored.

Mcartney a better songwriter than lennon?

You're living in a dream world.

I would have believed you mate till the last para when you said that Vista doesn't suck.

So how much money did Microsoft paid you to say that. Cos' no sane human being would say that unless blinded by MONEY...

@Dheeraj:

It doesnt suck, maybe your system sucks?

this whole debate sucks lets go play cards !!

and while your at it try my system

it will definately help you in learning to gain an edge in MTTs and sit n gos baby!

Chips, in what way did you (mis)use Windows to get "a lot of Windows BSODs"? In ten years of using Windows on an everyday basis, I have experienced only 3 BSODs, all of them were of my making. None were spontaneous. Also, since Windows is written for an infinite range of hardware, it may be unstable in some instances.

The fact that OSX is written for 3 or 4 very SPECIFIC hardware configurations, the fact that BSODs...ahem, "KERNEL PANICS," occur is not very reassuring of the software's stability and quality.

I am not a Microsoft fanboy - I like the Mac interface as much as the Windows one, but please stop pretending you are honest when you really are one of those zealous, die-hard Mac fans. Try and find other useful things to do with your time than troll on random posts when someone has the audacity to criticise your God, I mean, Apple.

National Transportation Safety Board recently divulged they had funded a project with the US auto makers for the past five years. The NTSB covertly funded a project whereby the auto makers were installing black boxes in four wheel drive pickup trucks in an effort to determine, in fatal accidents, the circumstances in the last 15 seconds before the crash.

They were surprised to find in 49 of the 50 states the last words of drivers in 61.2% of fatal crashes were, "Oh, Shit!"

Only the state of Texas was different, where 89.3% of the final words were, "Hey Y'all, hold my beer and watch this!"

« Franchise Marketing Online: How GOOGLE Ranks Your Website How to Get Franchise Press in a Targeted Market» Franchise Marketing Tools: Submit Articles Online Published by Sean June 9th, 2007 in Advertising:

This takes on special significance given Al Qaeda' s recent pattern of strikes associated with elections or political transitions. The United States faces increased risk of another attack over the next year and a half, which will make the transition to the next administration that much more important. Iraq may well be the dominant national security issue in the presidential campaign, but homeland security could well present the next president with his or her first national security challenge. This paper pro- ...

Do you think that as a single Christian, we should look into a potential partner's finances before entering into a relationship?

I am a resident of Milwaukee, and I do support a smoking ban. As a non- smoker, I fully utilize my rights NOT to smoke, but I am continously subjected to second hand smoke every time I go out to see a band play. I am a non- drinker as well, and I find it sad that I wake up the morning after a show feeling as if I have a hangover. My eyes are crusted over, and I generally feel sick all day long. I don' t support prying cigarettes out of smokers' hands, but give people a break. There' s no reason that every...

Just when you think you cant learn anymore. After reading your blog I now understand "buy stock on line". Thank For the great post!

Love that info. After reading your blog I now understand "best online stock trading". Thank For the great post!

War between Microsoft & Apple is never going to end...