><From CLASSICCMP-owner(a)u.washington.edu Wed Feb 11 17:59:22 1998
>
><People try, but the age of hacking is gone. Right now, there is just
><nothing exciting in the computing industry. Wait till holographic
><memory, and so on. As for people who think that they are "hackers" and
>
>You got to be kidding. Just look around the edges at things like
>autonomus robots and navagation to suggest a few. Theres plenty to be
>done.
Yes, and one of the most evedeint (to me) is Artificial Intelligence. If
they're programmers that can do it, they'll probably be hackers. And, you
can tie that in with robotics, etc. to make a true human-computer
interface, something which could completely revolutionize what we're doing,
or, better yet, trying to do.
At 09:23 PM 2/11/98 -0600, you wrote:
>It really depends upon the company, I imagine, but I support the notion
>that if your dumpster set is the last version purchased for that license,
>(i.e., the former owner hasn't upgraded and is no longer using the program)
>then sure, you can upgrade it. If, however, that's not the last version,
>then it is not a valid version.
But if you don't know if it is the latest version on that license, is it
really hurting the company? If I'm dumpster diving for this stuff, it
stands to reason that I wouldn't normally buy that same product in the store.
>eliminate any of those, you can reduce the price. Downloading software
>with on-line manuals eliminates the media and packaging cost, so that is
>often cheaper.
That's one thing that gets me: Software coming out today with no manuals
still cost the same ammount when first released as earlier manual included
packages.
>The SPA has done that -- to set examples. But realistically, I wouldn't
>worry about it.
I never do. :)
-John Higginbotham-
-limbo.netpath.net-
At 12:24 PM 2/11/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Sounds legit to me. If I found a disk set of Autodesk 3d Studio in the
>dumpster, just the disks, no manuals, I'd sure as heck use it, but wouldn't
>expect any company support. If I then came across a higher version for that
>product and it was cheaper if you already owned a previous version (say it
>takes the older version disk to upgrade to newer, then I'd expect to pay
>the cheaper price, because it is upgrading the program found on my original
It really depends upon the company, I imagine, but I support the notion
that if your dumpster set is the last version purchased for that license,
(i.e., the former owner hasn't upgraded and is no longer using the program)
then sure, you can upgrade it. If, however, that's not the last version,
then it is not a valid version.
As I see it, there is a reason for offering an upgrade discount. The cost
of a piece of software is made up of several things: development costs,
media/packaging costs, support costs, and (of course) profit. If you can
eliminate any of those, you can reduce the price. Downloading software
with on-line manuals eliminates the media and packaging cost, so that is
often cheaper.
If you sell a piece of software to someone who already knows how to use it,
you can budget a lower support cost, hence the upgrade price. Fishing a
set of disks out of the dumpster does not necessarily reduce your expected
support needs; in some cases it may (hey, if you're dumpster diving for
software, you're probably not a newbie) and in some cases, it might
increase your need for support ("I installed this software, but it won't
run" [three hours later] "oh, you're missing the frobnitzer disk. I'll
send it to you."). (Note that making your software compatible with XYZ,
the most popular program can reduce support needs as well, hence the
competitive upgrade idea.)
>I'm sure any cold blooded lawyer worth his salt could tear down my logic
>and send me to the big house for having those disks and running them, but
>how many would take the time, effort and money to try?
The SPA has done that -- to set examples. But realistically, I wouldn't
worry about it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- O-
Uncle Roger "There is pleasure pure in being mad
roger(a)sinasohn.com that none but madmen know."
Roger Louis Sinasohn & Associates
San Francisco, California http://www.crl.com/~sinasohn/
<At 16:37 2/4/98 -0500, Allison wrote:
<><>My first one was the SR-10...the
<><>"wedge". $110, IIRC....Was that TI's first?
<>
<>Not by a long shot. The first was in late '71 and went for about $140
<>(8digit 4banger). I had one going into EE school.
<
<But that WAS the SR-10.
No it was not. the sr-10 was two years later and wedge shaped. This
was barely pocket sized and not wedge shaped. the sr10 has a few things
this one didn't like constant. I also have an SR11.
Allison
Someone related a story to me about a company (now defunct, and he
couldn't
remember the name) in the Southwest, that manufactured calculators...
Supposedly,
in an effort to obtain a loan (and thus, stave off bankruptcy), they
told a lending
institution that they wanted to "manufacture computers for the home
hobbyist
market, in kit form"... Supposedly, word got out, and they received
copious
orders (which I presume (never got the details)) they couldn't fill...
Anybody
know the "story behind the story", or was this guy "snowing" me?
Will
<From CLASSICCMP-owner(a)u.washington.edu Wed Feb 11 17:59:22 1998
<People try, but the age of hacking is gone. Right now, there is just
<nothing exciting in the computing industry. Wait till holographic
<memory, and so on. As for people who think that they are "hackers" and
You got to be kidding. Just look around the edges at things like
autonomus robots and navagation to suggest a few. Theres plenty to be
done.
Allison
>Organization: The University of Huddersfield HEC
>Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:08:31 +0100
>Subject: Past Computer Manufacturers
>From: "P.ATKINSON" <sdespa(a)pegasus.hud.ac.uk>
>
>I am currently working on a paper looking at the development of the
>designed form of the office computer, and to that end am trying to
>find out if certain computer manufacturers still exist or if not, what
>happened to them. If anyone has any idea I would be grateful, as I
>have to try to contact them in order to obtain copyright clearance.
>
>The companies concerned are:
>
>Muldivo
>Sanders
>Lear Siegler (Data Dynamics)
>Kienzle
>Mael
>Torch
>
>Hope someone can help
[and if anybody can, we can.... ;-) -- kc]
>Paul Atkinson
__________________________________________
Kip Crosby engine(a)chac.org
http://www.chac.org/index.html
Computer History Association of California
>I always thought it was a desire to _attain_ knowledge and apply it.
> ^^^^^^
>
Technology = applied knowledge, therefore a desire to attain knowledge
and use technology.
Now, unfortunately, people know that there is no reason to make a good
product because
a) Noone makes good products
b) They won't be proud of it anyway because the product won't be
noticed in the face of estabilished stuff.
People try, but the age of hacking is gone. Right now, there is just
nothing exciting in the computing industry. Wait till holographic
memory, and so on. As for people who think that they are "hackers" and
all they can do is use a Wardialer, I think they just need to feel proud
of something they do. These are mainly people who have no other way of
supporting themselves morally/emotionally. As the Unabomber would say,
"They have a disruption in their power process". What really doesn't
help is the "Hackers Manifesto", which pretends to imply that the
hackers are "fighting for a cause" of "freedom of information". If you
ask me, these "modern", "new age" ideas of freedom and community will
invariably lead to either something like the USSR or the USA. The USSR
is unquestionably a disaster in so many ways, and the USA is, in my
opinion, getting there.
Ok, kiddies, back on topic now... :)
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
This is not the origin of the term "bug". My source sez that it was in use
at least as far back as Edison's time.
> Can anyone confirm this is the origin of the term "bug"?
