NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/06/02/1086058889577.html


Microsoft has been granted a patent on the double-click by the US Patents and Trademark Office. The patent, number 6,727,830, was granted on April 27.


An abstract of the application says: "A method and system are provided for extending the functionality of application buttons on a limited resource computing device. Alternative application functions are launched based on the length of time an application button is pressed. A default function for an application is launched if the button is pressed for a short, i.e., normal, period of time.


"An alternative function of the application is launched if the button is pressed for a long, (e.g., at least one second), period of time. Still another function can be launched if the application button is pressed multiple times within a short period of time, e.g., double click."


The inventors have been cited as Charlton E. Lui and Jeffrey R. Blum and the assignee is Microsoft Corporation.


The field of the invention "relates generally to computer systems, and more particularly to increasing the functionality of application buttons on a limited resource computing device", the patent application says.



Microsoft said last year that it would be seeking to improve earnings from technology which it claims it invented and would be using its patent portfolio to do so.


Last year, the company said it would be charging for use of the FAT filesystem.


The New York-based Public Patent Foundation has filed a formal request with the US Patent and Trademark Office, asking that Microsoft's patent on this filesystem be revoked.


This is a prime example of why we shouldn't allow software patents.

For more information, see http://swpat.ffii.org/#intro

That's complete bullshit, Apple had it way before Windows. Lisa ring a bell?

I remember using the double-click on my dad's old Apple, like so many yrs ago

I don't know what Lisa is, but I'm against software patents as a whole.

Plus, it's usually bull when Microsoft claims to have invented anything

Hmm.. Microsoft, the Smart Parts (Paintball Nazi's) of Computers...

(For some background, Smart Parts has pattented many things, run many paintball compaines out of business, and earned a horrible reputation.. plus their markers suck anyway.)

Hmm.. Microsoft, the Smart Parts (Paintball Nazi's) of Computers...

(For some background, Smart Parts has pattented many things, run many paintball compaines out of business, and earned a horrible reputation.. plus their markers suck anyway.)

I don't know what Lisa is, but I'm against software patents as a whole.

Plus, it's usually bull when Microsoft claims to have invented anythingThe Lisa was the predecessor to the Macintosh. The Lisa preceeded Windows, and it used double-click. This is complete bullshit. Not only that, but every fscking OS in the world uses double-click. This is complete bullshit.

Hmm.. Microsoft, the Smart Parts (Paintball Nazi's) of Computers...

(For some background, Smart Parts has pattented many things, run many paintball compaines out of business, and earned a horrible reputation.. plus their markers suck anyway.)


'03 Shocker = shit

I don't know what Lisa is, but I'm against software patents as a whole.

Plus, it's usually bull when Microsoft claims to have invented anythingThe Lisa was the predecessor to the Macintosh. The Lisa preceeded Windows, and it used double-click. This is complete bullshit. Not only that, but every fscking OS in the world uses double-click. This is complete bullshit.

Definitely. But Microsoft will do anything to try and completely monopolize the computer software industry.

Hmm.. Microsoft, the Smart Parts (Paintball Nazi's) of Computers...

(For some background, Smart Parts has pattented many things, run many paintball compaines out of business, and earned a horrible reputation.. plus their markers suck anyway.)


'03 Shocker = shit

No one wants to hear about your paintball-related conspiracies anymore, you sad sack. Give it a rest. :P

I didn't even think that Microsoft invented the mouse, let alone the double click.

We now have Nazi revisionist history, Hollywood revisionist history and Microsoft revisionist history.

I didn't even think that Microsoft invented the mouse, let alone the double click.

We now have Nazi revisionist history, Hollywood revisionist history and Microsoft revisionist history.Nope, it did not invent either.

I don't know what Lisa is, but I'm against software patents as a whole.

Plus, it's usually bull when Microsoft claims to have invented anythingThe Lisa was the predecessor to the Macintosh. The Lisa preceeded Windows, and it used double-click. This is complete bullshit. Not only that, but every fscking OS in the world uses double-click. This is complete bullshit.

You seem to be confusing an OS (Operating System) with a GUI (Graphic Operating System) - thus MSDOS was an OS, but didn't use the double-click, while Windows 3 was a GUI and did, and more contemporarily linux is an OS which doesn't use the double-click, while X-windows is a GUI which does. HAving said that, I remain to be convinced that Microsoft have ant legitimate claim to patenting the double-click.

Microsoft only invented draconian licensing laws.

Well, that and the idea of making poor quality software, and releasing it anyway, at ridiculous prices.

Fortunately, we still have alternatives, and its completely possible to run a working computer system without any Microsoft software (though whether you'd count a computer running Microsoft software as "working" I'm not sure)

The only thing this proves, besides Microsoft again confirming that they will steep as low as is necessary in order to maintain their friggin' monopoly, is that the US Patents and Trademark Office is corrupt as hell. :evil: I mean, WHY THE HELL DID THEY GRANT MICROSOFT THAT PATENT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :evil:

I hope this is not the end of this, and that 'someone' will get to the bottom of this moronic decision on part of the US Patents and Trademark Office!!

The only thing this proves, besides Microsoft again confirming that they will steep as low as is necessary in order to maintain their friggin' monopoly, is that the US Patents and Trademark Office is corrupt as hell. :evil: I mean, WHY THE HELL DID THEY GRANT MICROSOFT THAT PATENT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :evil:

I hope this is not the end of this, and that 'someone' will get to the bottom of this moronic decision on part of the US Patents and Trademark Office!!

The only thing this proves, besides Microsoft again confirming that they will steep as low as is necessary in order to maintain their friggin' monopoly, is that the US Patents and Trademark Office is corrupt as hell. :evil: I mean, WHY THE HELL DID THEY GRANT MICROSOFT THAT PATENT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :evil:

I hope this is not the end of this, and that 'someone' will get to the bottom of this moronic decision on part of the US Patents and Trademark Office!!

The only thing this proves, besides Microsoft again confirming that they will steep as low as is necessary in order to maintain their friggin' monopoly, is that the US Patents and Trademark Office is corrupt as hell. :evil: I mean, WHY THE HELL DID THEY GRANT MICROSOFT THAT PATENT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :evil:

I hope this is not the end of this, and that 'someone' will get to the bottom of this moronic decision on part of the US Patents and Trademark Office!!Well, patents are awarded to whoever asks for them, not whoever actually invented the idea. Like the telephone for example.

I don't know what Lisa is, but I'm against software patents as a whole.

Plus, it's usually bull when Microsoft claims to have invented anythingThe Lisa was the predecessor to the Macintosh. The Lisa preceeded Windows, and it used double-click. This is complete bullshit. Not only that, but every fscking OS in the world uses double-click. This is complete bullshit.

You seem to be confusing an OS (Operating System) with a GUI (Graphic Operating System) - thus MSDOS was an OS, but didn't use the double-click, while Windows 3 was a GUI and did, and more contemporarily linux is an OS which doesn't use the double-click, while X-windows is a GUI which does. HAving said that, I remain to be convinced that Microsoft have ant legitimate claim to patenting the double-click.Then how about I clarify that. IT WAS IMPLIED THAT I MEANT AN OS THAT RAN A POINT-AND-CLICK INTERFACE.

EXCUSE MY ANGER PROBLEMS BUT I AM NOT HAPPY.

I don't know what Lisa is, but I'm against software patents as a whole.

Plus, it's usually bull when Microsoft claims to have invented anythingThe Lisa was the predecessor to the Macintosh. The Lisa preceeded Windows, and it used double-click. This is complete bullshit. Not only that, but every fscking OS in the world uses double-click. This is complete bullshit.

You seem to be confusing an OS (Operating System) with a GUI (Graphic Operating System) - thus MSDOS was an OS, but didn't use the double-click, while Windows 3 was a GUI and did, and more contemporarily linux is an OS which doesn't use the double-click, while X-windows is a GUI which does. HAving said that, I remain to be convinced that Microsoft have ant legitimate claim to patenting the double-click.Then how about I clarify that. IT WAS IMPLIED THAT I MEANT AN OS THAT RAN A POINT-AND-CLICK INTERFACE.

EXCUSE MY ANGER PROBLEMS BUT I AM NOT HAPPY.

I don't know what Lisa is, but I'm against software patents as a whole.

Plus, it's usually bull when Microsoft claims to have invented anythingThe Lisa was the predecessor to the Macintosh. The Lisa preceeded Windows, and it used double-click. This is complete bullshit. Not only that, but every fscking OS in the world uses double-click. This is complete bullshit.

You seem to be confusing an OS (Operating System) with a GUI (Graphic Operating System) - thus MSDOS was an OS, but didn't use the double-click, while Windows 3 was a GUI and did, and more contemporarily linux is an OS which doesn't use the double-click, while X-windows is a GUI which does. HAving said that, I remain to be convinced that Microsoft have ant legitimate claim to patenting the double-click.Then how about I clarify that. IT WAS IMPLIED THAT I MEANT AN OS THAT RAN A POINT-AND-CLICK INTERFACE.

EXCUSE MY ANGER PROBLEMS BUT I AM NOT HAPPY.

*sorry if this is a multiple post, the NS server must really hate me

Richard M. Stallman had this to say about software patents:


The best way for a nonprogrammer to understand what this is like is to compare the writing of these large programs with another area in which people write something very large symphonies. Imagine if the governments of Europe in the 1700's had wanted to promote progress in symphonic music by adopting a system of music patents. So that any idea that could be described in words could be patented if it seem to be new and original. So you'd be able to patent, say your three note melodic motive which is too short to be but it would have been patentable and may they could have patented a certain chord progression and may be patented using a certain combination of instruments playing at the same time or any other idea that somebody could describe.


Well, by 1800 there would have been thousands of these music idea patents. And then imagine that you are Beethoven and you want to write a symphony. To write a whole symphony, you are going to have to do lots of different things and at any point you could be using an idea that somebody else has patented. Of course, if you do that, he'll say "oh! you are just a thief, why can't you write something original". Well Beethoven had more than his share of new musical ideas. But he used a lot of existing musical ideas. He had to, because that is the only way to make it recognisable. If you don't do that, people won't listen at all. Paebulus thought he was going to totally reinvent the language of music and he tried and nobody listens to it because it doesn't use all the ideas that they were familiar with. So you have to use the old ideas that other people have thought of.

--doublepost--

--triplepost--

The only thing this proves, besides Microsoft again confirming that they will steep as low as is necessary in order to maintain their friggin' monopoly, is that the US Patents and Trademark Office is corrupt as hell. :evil: I mean, WHY THE HELL DID THEY GRANT MICROSOFT THAT PATENT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :evil:

I hope this is not the end of this, and that 'someone' will get to the bottom of this moronic decision on part of the US Patents and Trademark Office!!Well, patents are awarded to whoever asks for them, not whoever actually invented the idea. Like the telephone for example.

I didn't know that :( I always figured the one filling for a patent had to prove they invented whatever they wanted to get a patent for.

Say what? :?

When it comes to patents it doesn't matter who developed a device, method or system first, whoever patents it first gets all the rights to the creation for the length of the patent.

I don't believe that we should eliminate the patenting of software. If you know anything about programming and the amount of time it takes to figure out just a few lines of code of the many millions that are eventually written in order to create a program then you'll know why I think it should be protected by a patent. However, I do agree that this double click case, and many similar cases like it, is ridiculous and undermines the value of intellectual property.

Gah!!! What a load of rubbish!!!!

Firstly MS nor Apple 'invented' the mouse based GUI....you gotta go past PARC (and if you don't know what PARC is then you have nothing to say about GUI's) to Vannevar Bush in the 40's....and Ivan Sutherland before you can even touch on Rankin...

As for Patents...it is my understanding that patents are awarded for the application to which they are used....hence you cannot patent genes....but you can patent gene therapy techniques.

:evil:

I don't believe that we should eliminate the patenting of software. If you know anything about programming and the amount of time it takes to figure out just a few lines of code of the many millions that are eventually written in order to create a program then you'll know why I think it should be protected by a patent.

If you don't want someone using your code, you copyright it, not patent it. Patent means someone can't even use similar methods.

I dont know if this'll affect much as it'll be rather hard to enforce, ages ago some company (I think it was bandai but i could be wrong) patented 2D scrolling in games, everyone kept on using it of course because it was so useful, bandai challenged them and the case was thrown out. Sega did the same thing with moving 3D cameras but i dont think they've used the patent yet.

But with microsoft's legal clout i suppose anything could happen.

Software patents are basically an attempt on the part of large corporations such as Microsoft to take smaller software developers out of the business, without actually resorting to making a better product or lowering prices.

They have seen that free/open-source operating systems and software are a big threat, due to being both cheaper and better quality. They cannot defeat them the way they have defeated other proprietry software developers, so they are trying to use different techniques to reinforce their monopoly.

Software patents are basically an attempt on the part of large corporations such as Microsoft to take smaller software developers out of the business, without actually resorting to making a better product or lowering prices.

They have seen that free/open-source operating systems and software are a big threat, due to being both cheaper and better quality. They cannot defeat them the way they have defeated other proprietry software developers, so they are trying to use different techniques to reinforce their monopoly.

People seem to forget though how Microsoft gained that monopoly, they had the software people wanted to use. No offence intended but: Linux is annoying (and not for use by home users), Mac is a 'pretty system' for designers and not much else. Microsoft gained its dominance through Gates's business skill and good software, if the free operating systems were nearly as good they could gain more market.

Software patents are basically an attempt on the part of large corporations such as Microsoft to take smaller software developers out of the business, without actually resorting to making a better product or lowering prices.

They have seen that free/open-source operating systems and software are a big threat, due to being both cheaper and better quality. They cannot defeat them the way they have defeated other proprietry software developers, so they are trying to use different techniques to reinforce their monopoly.

People seem to forget though how Microsoft gained that monopoly, they had the software people wanted to use. No offence intended but: Linux is annoying (and not for use by home users), Mac is a 'pretty system' for designers and not much else. Microsoft gained its dominance through Gates's business skill and good software, if the free operating systems were nearly as good they could gain more market.

Are you kidding? Microsoft gained market dominance through various means, particularly anticompetitive business strategies.

I am a home user, running Linux right now. It is not annoying, and I need no special expertise to do anything. I point & click just as a windows user would. The only significant different is that my computer has never crashed running Linux, and I do not worry about viruses and other security problems.

Some more information (http://www.microsuck.com/content/whatsbad.shtml)

Software patents are basically an attempt on the part of large corporations such as Microsoft to take smaller software developers out of the business, without actually resorting to making a better product or lowering prices.

They have seen that free/open-source operating systems and software are a big threat, due to being both cheaper and better quality. They cannot defeat them the way they have defeated other proprietry software developers, so they are trying to use different techniques to reinforce their monopoly.

People seem to forget though how Microsoft gained that monopoly, they had the software people wanted to use. No offence intended but: Linux is annoying (and not for use by home users), Mac is a 'pretty system' for designers and not much else. Microsoft gained its dominance through Gates's business skill and good software, if the free operating systems were nearly as good they could gain more market.

Are you kidding? Microsoft gained market dominance through various means, particularly anticompetitive business strategies.

I am a home user, running Linux right now. It is not annoying, and I need no special expertise to do anything. I point & click just as a windows user would. The only significant different is that my computer has never crashed running Linux, and I do not worry about viruses and other security problems.

Some more information (http://www.microsuck.com/content/whatsbad.shtml)

LOLOLOLOL oh dear.

I use Linux sometimes, and I find a lot of things don't run on it, it is far too complicated for many a home user, who is not willing to put time into it, and the only reason it is less suceptible to viruses, is hardly anyone uses it so it isn't worth writing viruses for it.

I'm guessing you either have an old version of linux, or you are trying to do something like run MS Office on it instead of using an equivalent, like OpenOffice.org.

Its lower succeptability to virus is partly because there are less, but also because it has better security.

Software patents are basically an attempt on the part of large corporations such as Microsoft to take smaller software developers out of the business, without actually resorting to making a better product or lowering prices.

They have seen that free/open-source operating systems and software are a big threat, due to being both cheaper and better quality. They cannot defeat them the way they have defeated other proprietry software developers, so they are trying to use different techniques to reinforce their monopoly.

People seem to forget though how Microsoft gained that monopoly, they had the software people wanted to use. No offence intended but: Linux is annoying (and not for use by home users), Mac is a 'pretty system' for designers and not much else. Microsoft gained its dominance through Gates's business skill and good software, if the free operating systems were nearly as good they could gain more market.

Are you kidding? Microsoft gained market dominance through various means, particularly anticompetitive business strategies.

I am a home user, running Linux right now. It is not annoying, and I need no special expertise to do anything. I point & click just as a windows user would. The only significant different is that my computer has never crashed running Linux, and I do not worry about viruses and other security problems.

Some more information (http://www.microsuck.com/content/whatsbad.shtml)

LOLOLOLOL oh dear.

Huh? Other than the fact that you are laughing out laughing out ... do you have anything to contribute here?

Perhaps you are disputing my claims, in which case I can't be bothered to argue. It's your money wasted, not mine.

Software patents are basically an attempt on the part of large corporations such as Microsoft to take smaller software developers out of the business, without actually resorting to making a better product or lowering prices.

They have seen that free/open-source operating systems and software are a big threat, due to being both cheaper and better quality. They cannot defeat them the way they have defeated other proprietry software developers, so they are trying to use different techniques to reinforce their monopoly.

People seem to forget though how Microsoft gained that monopoly, they had the software people wanted to use. No offence intended but: Linux is annoying (and not for use by home users), Mac is a 'pretty system' for designers and not much else. Microsoft gained its dominance through Gates's business skill and good software, if the free operating systems were nearly as good they could gain more market.

Are you kidding? Microsoft gained market dominance through various means, particularly anticompetitive business strategies.

I am a home user, running Linux right now. It is not annoying, and I need no special expertise to do anything. I point & click just as a windows user would. The only significant different is that my computer has never crashed running Linux, and I do not worry about viruses and other security problems.

Some more information (http://www.microsuck.com/content/whatsbad.shtml)

LOLOLOLOL oh dear.

Huh? Other than the fact that you are laughing out laughing out ... do you have anything to contribute here?

Perhaps you are disputing my claims, in which case I can't be bothered to argue. It's your money wasted, not mine.

well besides the fact that you have no idea what you are talking about in your 'history' of GUI's carry on....you are making my day...

Linux virus free LOL

oh dear....

Software patents are basically an attempt on the part of large corporations such as Microsoft to take smaller software developers out of the business, without actually resorting to making a better product or lowering prices.

They have seen that free/open-source operating systems and software are a big threat, due to being both cheaper and better quality. They cannot defeat them the way they have defeated other proprietry software developers, so they are trying to use different techniques to reinforce their monopoly.

People seem to forget though how Microsoft gained that monopoly, they had the software people wanted to use. No offence intended but: Linux is annoying (and not for use by home users), Mac is a 'pretty system' for designers and not much else. Microsoft gained its dominance through Gates's business skill and good software, if the free operating systems were nearly as good they could gain more market.

Are you kidding? Microsoft gained market dominance through various means, particularly anticompetitive business strategies.

I am a home user, running Linux right now. It is not annoying, and I need no special expertise to do anything. I point & click just as a windows user would. The only significant different is that my computer has never crashed running Linux, and I do not worry about viruses and other security problems.

Some more information (http://www.microsuck.com/content/whatsbad.shtml)

I agree. But really, posting a URL called "Microsuck"? Uhm... not a good way to convince anyone.

And this patent shouldn't have ever happened. Microsoft did not invent the double-click. Even if they did, I can't help but feel there's something fundamentally wrong with patenting something like that, as there was with BT's attempt to cash in on a claimed patent on the hyperlink. Would you like to be paying British Telecom every time you include a link on your web site? Nah, didn't think so.

If you have a bit of code you want to protect, use copyright. Patents are too strong for software.

well besides the fact that you have no idea what you are talking about in your 'history' of GUI's carry on....you are making my day...

oh dear....

Ah, I don't know what I'm talking about in my history of GUI's eh? Good one. Or it would be if I had posted ANYTHING about the history of GUIs. :?


Linux virus free LOL

I never said that either, just that linux users didnt have to worry about viruses as much.

Are you replying to the right person?

I agree. But really, posting a URL called "Microsuck"? Uhm... not a good way to convince anyone.

Well I thought it looked useful. If people look at an URL and decide whether to read something based on that, I think trying to convince them of anything is not a very good way to spend one's time.

I agree. But really, posting a URL called "Microsuck"? Uhm... not a good way to convince anyone.

Well I thought it looked useful. If people look at an URL and decide whether to read something based on that, I think trying to convince them of anything is not a very good way to spend one's time.

well besides the fact that you have no idea what you are talking about in your 'history' of GUI's carry on....you are making my day...

oh dear....

Ah, I don't know what I'm talking about in my history of GUI's eh? Good one. Or it would be if I had posted ANYTHING about the history of GUIs. :?


Linux virus free LOL

I never said that either, just that linux users didnt have to worry about viruses as much.

Are you replying to the right person?

You failed to mention that GUI work was done way WAY before Apple.....

as for your virus statement -

The only significant different is that my computer has never crashed running Linux, and I do not worry about viruses and other security problems.

Seem to me that that says you are virus free....

So you use Linux....wow....I am underwhelmed....go to slashdot and play with the rest of the linux ditto heads....

You failed to mention that GUI work was done way WAY before Apple.....

I think someone else was talking about Apple, not me. I believe the first GUI was the sketchpad, made in the 60's for technical drawing, but I don't know. I didn't mention it because I don't know.


The only significant different is that my computer has never crashed running Linux, and I do not worry about viruses and other security problems.

Seem to me that that says you are virus free....

I said I don't worry, and I don't. At the current time, my system is free of viruses, and it will be a while before linux users have to worry about them.


So you use Linux....wow....I am underwhelmed....go to slashdot and play with the rest of the linux ditto heads....

Um...this has WHAT to do with the topic of software patents? Hmmm.. can't think of anything.

And what is "ditto head" supposed to mean? That I echo other people's opinions? Sorry, that's wrong. My opinions are my own.

Please take the flaming and baiting elsewhere.

People seem to forget though how Microsoft gained that monopoly, they had the software people wanted to use. No offence intended but: Linux is annoying (and not for use by home users), Mac is a 'pretty system' for designers and not much else. Microsoft gained its dominance through Gates's business skill and good software, if the free operating systems were nearly as good they could gain more market.
Well, let's see about that, The Human Genome Project, Dead Sea Scrolls Project, Macy's catalog, too many tv news and newspapers to list here, and nearly all the recording and magazine industries use Macs in some or all of production with exception of the final print run. Gates himself has 3 Macs, in fact he wrote his last book on one.

Apple may have been the route of it all(or was it) but is there any evidence they created this? :evil: The patent office must be having a slow boring time if they are going to waste their time on this. There must be a different way to make money.

If Haydn had patented "a symphony, characterised by that sound is produced [ in extended sonata form ]", Mozart would have been in trouble.

Unlike copyright, patents can block independent creations. Software patents can render software copyright useless. One copyrighted work can be covered by hundreds of patents of which the author doesn't even know but for whose infringement he and his users can be sued. Some of these patents may be impossible to work around, because they are broad or because they are part of communication standards.


Evidence from economic studies shows that software patents have lead to a decrease in R&D spending.


Advances in software are advances in abstraction. While traditional patents were for concrete and physical inventions, software patents cover ideas. Instead of patenting a specific mousetrap, you patent any "means of trapping mammals" or "means of trapping data in an emulated environment". The fact that the universal logic device called "computer" is used for this does not constitute a limitation. When software is patentable, anything is patentable.


In most countries, software has, like mathematics and other abstract subject matter, been explicitely considered to be outside the scope of patentable inventions. However these rules were broken one or another way. The patent system has gone out of control. A closed community of patent lawyers is creating, breaking and rewriting its own rules without much supervision from the outside.


source: http://swpat.ffii.org/#intro

You failed to mention that GUI work was done way WAY before Apple.....

I think someone else was talking about Apple, not me. I believe the first GUI was the sketchpad, made in the 60's for technical drawing, but I don't know. I didn't mention it because I don't know.


The only significant different is that my computer has never crashed running Linux, and I do not worry about viruses and other security problems.

Seem to me that that says you are virus free....

I said I don't worry, and I don't. At the current time, my system is free of viruses, and it will be a while before linux users have to worry about them.


So you use Linux....wow....I am underwhelmed....go to slashdot and play with the rest of the linux ditto heads....

Um...this has WHAT to do with the topic of software patents? Hmmm.. can't think of anything.

And what is "ditto head" supposed to mean? That I echo other people's opinions? Sorry, that's wrong. My opinions are my own.

Please take the flaming and baiting elsewhere.

damn! yep....my apologies re the history thing....it was Terra M...not you...

First GUI idea was Vannavar Bush back in the 40's...

As for the virus thang....well you posted that you are virus free and will be for the forseeable future...well fact is that Linux is as vulnerable as Windoze....

I called you ditto head (possibly wrongly) as Linux people have a real chip on their shoulder about MS...

well fact is that Linux is as vulnerable as Windoze....

Well, many people believe it is more secure. I won't try to defend that statement as I don't know much on the subject.
I do know, that at the current time there are 60,000 known viruses for windows and 40 for linux, but as I believe you already said, this will increase with the popularity of linux.


I called you ditto head (possibly wrongly) as Linux people have a real chip on their shoulder about MS...
That is because many Linux users are ex-Microsoft users. They, like me, dislike Microsoft for their business practices. It is this, more than the (sometimes exaggerated) faults of their software that bothers people.
The support of software patents and other methods for monopolizing the market (not a good thing, as I'm sure I don't need to explain).

well fact is that Linux is as vulnerable as Windoze....

Well, many people believe it is more secure. I won't try to defend that statement as I don't know much on the subject.
I do know, that at the current time there are 60,000 known viruses for windows and 40 for linux, but as I believe you already said, this will increase with the popularity of linux.


I called you ditto head (possibly wrongly) as Linux people have a real chip on their shoulder about MS...
That is because many Linux users are ex-Microsoft users. They, like me, dislike Microsoft for their business practices. It is this, more than the (sometimes exaggerated) faults of their software that bothers people.
The support of software patents and other methods for monopolizing the market (not a good thing, as I'm sure I don't need to explain).

Yeah....as Linux becomes more widespread there will be an increase in nasties....hell its happening with Macs and Unix systems more and more as well...

I will admit though that I made a mistake in saying that Linux is as vulnerable as Linux. Linux has one advantage....decent version control.

As for LInux users being ex MS peeps....hehe funny you should say that....!

I am looking at Mandrake 10, SUSE or BSD for my network....will keep a couple of workstations for games....but the rest....firewall, stmp, proxy and web server....on *ix systems...

Yeah....as Linux becomes more widespread there will be an increase in nasties....hell its happening with Macs and Unix systems more and more as well...

I will admit though that I made a mistake in saying that Linux is as vulnerable as Linux. Linux has one advantage....decent version control.

As for LInux users being ex MS peeps....hehe funny you should say that....!

I am looking at Mandrake 10, SUSE or BSD for my network....will keep a couple of workstations for games....but the rest....firewall, stmp, proxy and web server....on *ix systems...

I currently use SuSE Linux Professional 9.0, and have done for five months. I can say with all honesty that the OS has never crashed.

Previous to this I was a Windows user (for about 13 years). I used Windows 3.1, Windows 3.11 (3.1 got a virus, had to be replaced), Windows 98, and Windows XP at home. Windows NT and Windows 2000 at school.

Yes, games are the one thing I still need Windows for. It is possible to emulate windows games in a GNU/Linux OS, but not for someone with as little expertise as me.

Oh, by the way, BSD is not a GNU/Linux OS, but it is UNIX-based.

*sorry if this is multi-post, you know what the server is like

Yeah....as Linux becomes more widespread there will be an increase in nasties....hell its happening with Macs and Unix systems more and more as well...

I will admit though that I made a mistake in saying that Linux is as vulnerable as Linux. Linux has one advantage....decent version control.

As for LInux users being ex MS peeps....hehe funny you should say that....!

I am looking at Mandrake 10, SUSE or BSD for my network....will keep a couple of workstations for games....but the rest....firewall, stmp, proxy and web server....on *ix systems...

I currently use SuSE Linux Professional 9.0, and have done for five months. I can say with all honesty that the OS has never crashed.

Previous to this I was a Windows user (for about 13 years). I used Windows 3.1, Windows 3.11 (3.1 got a virus, had to be replaced), Windows 98, and Windows XP at home. Windows NT and Windows 2000 at school.

Yes, games are the one thing I still need Windows for. It is possible to emulate windows games in a GNU/Linux OS, but not for someone with as little expertise as me.

Oh, by the way, BSD is not a GNU/Linux OS, but it is UNIX-based.

*sorry if this is multi-post, you know what the server is like

yes sadly I do know what this server is like....ggggrrrrrrrrrrr

I've been computering since the mid to late 70's....so I've seen all sorts...but its only in the last what....6 or 7 years that things have gotten out of hand...

I am looking at some kind of *nix for my network...I like the idea of freeBSD on the firewall and then whatever on the other machines....but I am a newbie in regards to these O/S's....I have been much more MS based than anything else (although I have worked on DEC VAX and VMS machines and a bit of AS400)...

Oh, by the way, BSD is not a GNU/Linux OS, but it is UNIX-based

yeah...hence I used *nix

Oh, by the way, BSD is not a GNU/Linux OS, but it is UNIX-based

yeah...hence I used *nix

Oops...obviously tried to make up for server loading time by not reading properly.

Do you have a job working in the computing industry?

Oh, by the way, BSD is not a GNU/Linux OS, but it is UNIX-based

yeah...hence I used *nix

Oops...obviously tried to make up for server loading time by not reading properly.

Do you have a job working in the computing industry?

*I think whoever designed this forum's submission system confused the idea of a command with a request.

Oh, by the way, BSD is not a GNU/Linux OS, but it is UNIX-based

yeah...hence I used *nix

Oops...obviously tried to make up for server loading time by not reading properly.

Do you have a job working in the computing industry?

*I think whoever designed this forum's submission system confused the idea of a command with a request.

Yeah...

I've been playing around with computers since the 70's...nowadays I work as a free lance IT consultant.

Funnily enough just been offered a contract to support 400 OS2 servers (although the company has something in the region of 2000 servers and 60000 workstations) and 25000 workstations.

Wasn't it a UK patent?

Yaknow... All your anti-Microsoft crap aside, this style of programming could be awesome. Imagine the gaming possibilities when different functions in the game can be assigned to types of clicks. It'd make Keyboards less nessicary.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/06/02/1086058889577.html


Microsoft has been granted a patent on the double-click by the US Patents and Trademark Office. The patent, number 6,727,830, was granted on April 27.


An abstract of the application says: "A method and system are provided for extending the functionality of application buttons on a limited resource computing device. Alternative application functions are launched based on the length of time an application button is pressed. A default function for an application is launched if the button is pressed for a short, i.e., normal, period of time.


"An alternative function of the application is launched if the button is pressed for a long, (e.g., at least one second), period of time. Still another function can be launched if the application button is pressed multiple times within a short period of time, e.g., double click."


The inventors have been cited as Charlton E. Lui and Jeffrey R. Blum and the assignee is Microsoft Corporation.


The field of the invention "relates generally to computer systems, and more particularly to increasing the functionality of application buttons on a limited resource computing device", the patent application says.



Microsoft said last year that it would be seeking to improve earnings from technology which it claims it invented and would be using its patent portfolio to do so.


Last year, the company said it would be charging for use of the FAT filesystem.


The New York-based Public Patent Foundation has filed a formal request with the US Patent and Trademark Office, asking that Microsoft's patent on this filesystem be revoked.


This is a prime example of why we shouldn't allow software patents.

For more information, see http://swpat.ffii.org/#intro
Oh my God, you God damned wanker. You edited out ENTIRE PARAGRAPHS OF THE QUOTED MATERIAL. People, read the actual article, not this guy's bullshit. It says that that patent was issued for a method of activating certain functions of a PDA. :roll: Wankers.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/06/02/1086058889577.html


Microsoft has been granted a patent on the double-click by the US Patents and Trademark Office. The patent, number 6,727,830, was granted on April 27.


An abstract of the application says: "A method and system are provided for extending the functionality of application buttons on a limited resource computing device. Alternative application functions are launched based on the length of time an application button is pressed. A default function for an application is launched if the button is pressed for a short, i.e., normal, period of time.


"An alternative function of the application is launched if the button is pressed for a long, (e.g., at least one second), period of time. Still another function can be launched if the application button is pressed multiple times within a short period of time, e.g., double click."


The inventors have been cited as Charlton E. Lui and Jeffrey R. Blum and the assignee is Microsoft Corporation.


The field of the invention "relates generally to computer systems, and more particularly to increasing the functionality of application buttons on a limited resource computing device", the patent application says.



Microsoft said last year that it would be seeking to improve earnings from technology which it claims it invented and would be using its patent portfolio to do so.


Last year, the company said it would be charging for use of the FAT filesystem.


The New York-based Public Patent Foundation has filed a formal request with the US Patent and Trademark Office, asking that Microsoft's patent on this filesystem be revoked.


This is a prime example of why we shouldn't allow software patents.

For more information, see http://swpat.ffii.org/#intro
Oh my God, you God damned wanker. You edited out ENTIRE PARAGRAPHS OF THE QUOTED MATERIAL. People, read the actual article, not this guy's bullshit. It says that that patent was issued for a method of activating certain functions of a PDA. :roll: Wankers.

That's GNU-Linux for you. I read about it in New Scientist.

That's GNU-Linux for you. I read about it in New Scientist.
Meh, all he's done is convince me that he's a piece of garbage, not that "Microsoft is the devil!oneone!11"