Mentec US is gone! - DEC

This is a discussion on Mentec US is gone! - DEC ; In article , "Giorgio Ungarelli" wrote: >"Bill Gunshannon" wrote in message >news:4ueiueF17uuivU1@mid.individual.net... >>> >>> If the copyright is just left orphaned, then I guess that's OK for >>> hobbyists as well, as it opens up the doors of free redistribution, ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 187

Thread: Mentec US is gone!

  1. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article <4582eeaf$1_6@news.bluewin.ch>,
    "Giorgio Ungarelli" wrote:
    >"Bill Gunshannon" wrote in message
    >news:4ueiueF17uuivU1@mid.individual.net...
    >>>
    >>> If the copyright is just left orphaned, then I guess that's OK for
    >>> hobbyists as well, as it opens up the doors of free redistribution, but
    >>> would probably be bad for those proud few still using the -11 in their
    >>> businesses.

    >>
    >> And, it would also be illegal. Copyrights are never "abandoned". Unless
    >> the owner explicitly releases the software either to the public domain
    >> or under something like the BSD License or the Gnu Public Virus then it
    >> remains their property and bound by their rules. That means without an
    >> explicit license to do so, it would be illegal to use it on anything.
    >>

    >
    >But if nobody is there to "enforce" it (the company no longer exists and/or
    >the new owners can't be bothered to do anything about it), does it really
    >matter?

    Does anybody own Mentec stock? If so, read their annual report
    and see if it says anything.

    /BAH

  2. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article ,
    Thierry Dussuet writes:
    > On 2006-12-16, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
    >> Being a hobbyist does not give you the right to use someone else's
    >> property. I have a friend who is a TV show addict. Can he start
    >> using your VCD to tape shows, without your permission, of course.

    >
    > That's ok, it just sits around else :-)
    >
    > I think the problem is not that people want to steal Mentec's licenses but
    > rather that most don't have the capital to pay a "real" license.
    > Since they are ready to pay a smaller fee, as the VMS Hobbyist program has
    > shown, I think they _would_ make more profits if they were allowed to just hand
    > a copy of the distribution media or allow to copy it.


    Most of my students are not willing to pay $180 for their Chem text book.
    Some have a real hard time affording it. So, would that make it OK for
    them to Xerox someone else's book? How about if they send the publisher
    $10?

    Why do people insist that the rules for computer software should be
    different than they are for other forms of IP? The value of an item
    is not set by what the buyer is willing or able to pay. It is set by
    the owner of the IP. If you can negotiate a better price, fine, but
    the owner has no responsibility to do so and if he chooses not to it
    certainly doesn't give you the right to just take it. Knowing how
    they have been treated in the past and the fact that this attitude has
    not changed no matter how much some people have pointed out its errors,
    I would not be at all surprised if, when Mentec finally decides to end
    the commercial life of these OSes, they just destroy all copies of source
    and object just because of the contempt they probably h old for the
    hobbyist community. A sad comentary.

    bill

    --
    Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    University of Scranton |
    Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

  3. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    Bill Gunshannon wrote:
    >
    > Most of my students are not willing to pay $180 for their Chem text book.
    > Some have a real hard time affording it. So, would that make it OK for
    > them to Xerox someone else's book? How about if they send the publisher
    > $10?
    >
    > Why do people insist that the rules for computer software should be
    > different than they are for other forms of IP? The value of an item
    > is not set by what the buyer is willing or able to pay. It is set by
    > the owner of the IP. If you can negotiate a better price, fine, but
    > the owner has no responsibility to do so and if he chooses not to it
    > certainly doesn't give you the right to just take it. Knowing how
    > they have been treated in the past and the fact that this attitude has
    > not changed no matter how much some people have pointed out its errors,
    > I would not be at all surprised if, when Mentec finally decides to end
    > the commercial life of these OSes, they just destroy all copies of source
    > and object just because of the contempt they probably h old for the
    > hobbyist community. A sad comentary.
    >
    > bill
    >


    C'mon Bill, a bit of a dodgy argument in this case. Fact: Hobbyists are
    interested in running old dec os's for amusement or interest, not for
    commercial gain. As for Mentec, no-one seems to be sure if they are even
    interested in the product anymore. If, for example, I send an email to
    Mentec and they either fail to reply, or tell me that they no longer
    sell the product or support it or even that they don't know what i'm
    talking about and / or no, you can't have it for free either. The
    copyright still applies, but the product is effectively abandoned and no
    longer available at all except by using existing media out there in the
    field.

    In this case, what do hobbyists do ?. If the product has effectively
    been abandoned by it's owner, it may be technically illegal to run it,
    but is anyone likely to care, ?. Of course, we would all like to live
    within the law, but if a vendor is being intentionally obstructive,
    there's a reasonable argument for just doing it anyway, especially if no
    loss is generated for any of the interested parties.

    I run Ultrix 3.1 here perfectly legally on an 11/53 and have no real
    time at present to play with that or pursue other pdp interests, but it
    would be good to have a definitive answer from Mentec as to the
    product's status in terms of licensing, can we or can't we ?...

    Chris


  4. Re: Mentec US is gone!


    Bill Gunshannon wrote:
    > Being a hobbyist does not give you the right to use someone else's
    > property. I have a friend who is a TV show addict. Can he start
    > using your VCD to tape shows, without your permission, of course.
    > I am beginning to think maybe the RIAA is right!!
    >
    > bill


    I don't disagree with the fact that we have no RIGHTS to use the old
    stuff, I'm just saying that maybe the new owners of Mentec will be more
    willing to give us that PRIVILEGE than the former owners... If they
    don't that will be sad, but that's life.


  5. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article ,
    ChrisQuayle writes:
    >
    > Why do you get in such a lather about this ?. Methinks you protesteth
    > too much :-).


    Well, for one reason because being one of those who will not use
    software illegally I was directly affected by Mentec's stopping
    work on a Hobbyist License. I don't protest, I tell it like it is.
    I have actually seen software piracy cases and was even notified
    in one case that I might be called to testify in court about it.

    > I suppose all the software you have ever used, even for
    > testing, has been properly licenced, hasn't it.


    Of course it has. Why is that so hard to understand? And, I have
    fought a constant battle to keep all of the machines under my service
    at the University in the same state to include fighting with professors
    and students who "just want to install it for a few days". Not in my
    lab!!

    > I'm not saying we should
    > just take the law into our own hands, but it would be nice to have some
    > indication.


    Indication of what? Mentec has been quite clear. No Hobbyist License.
    What further indication do you want?

    > My rule on licenced software is that it's ok to install for
    > evaluation.


    And the courts don't agree with you. You have on those rights granted to
    you by the owner. If he doesn't explicitly allow that then it is illegal
    and immoral. But I know I am not going to change your mind or your behavior.
    Court could, however.

    > That is, is it worth paying for ?. If so, I buy a copy if
    > affordable, otherwise it doesn't get used and I find a substitute. It
    > may not be following the letter of the law, but certainly the spirit in
    > "valuable ip" terms.


    No, it doesn't follow the letter or the "spirit" of the law (whatever
    that is supposed to be). It is just plain wrong.

    >
    > In the absence of a clear yes or no, one might think (yes, maybe
    > wrongly) that they don't care about hobbyist use, but at the same time
    > don't want to give carte blanche, as this in iteslf would require quite
    > a lot of effort and expense on their part to frame the necessary
    > documentation.


    You seem a bit confused here. What they have not done is say that
    hobbyists can use it. That's waht you want. Quite the contrary,
    by dropping all negotiations for a hobbyist license they have very
    plainly said, "No". Unfortunately, it seems the hobbyist community
    can't hear anythng if it isn't "Yes". ANd they are never going to
    hear that.

    > Why should they - they may have originally bought the ip,
    > but would guess that it's getting to the commercially valueless stage by
    > now,


    And you would be wrong. I personally know of a lot of people still using
    (and paying for) it commercially. Just because they don't advertise in
    PC World doesn't mean it is dead. How about VMS? Is it also abandoned?
    I just read a note from someone who has posted a cash reward for anyone
    who can show him a single VMS advertising in the major IT Press. He
    specifically mentioned that up to this point, no one has claimed it.
    Does that mean VMS is "getting to the commercially valueless stage" and
    would be alright to just take it if there wasn't a hobbyist program?

    > so they don't won't want to spend any more resources on it, even to
    > give it away. I wouldn't think they could be bothered setting up a
    > hobbyits license either. PDP is not core business and the financial
    > return negligable. Net result, systems in limbo.


    But that is your opinion with no basis in fact. They still sell it and
    maintain it. They just don't include you in the distribution for the
    memoes. How short-sighted of them....

    >
    > You say commercial licenses are still available - any idea what these
    > cost,


    Yeah, more than you would be willing to pay, I am sure. But I don't
    work for Mentec so I am not going to give you a quote.

    > or do Mentec not answer calls on the subject anymore ?.


    I have had dealings with them within the past year. As, I am sure, have
    the many people who still actively license the products they sell.

    > The other
    > question would be, what pre Mentec versions can we run legally, if any ?...


    On real hardware none. There are some who say that the current versions
    of SIMH are covered by the license Bob Supnik (I believe) arranged with
    them several years ago. I am not sure as I don't think current versions
    of SIMH meet the definition of an Emulator in the License. But I will
    defer to Bob on this as he negotiated it and probably has a much better
    understanding of what the Agreement actually meant.


    As I said above, I am sure nothing I say will change your mind or your
    actions. But, I respect Mentec's IP and I will actively attempt to
    dispel the strange nothions that frequently pop up here claiming that
    this software is up for grabs and hobbyists are free to do what they
    please with it. Who knows, maybe at some point I will convince enough
    people that Mentec will see a change int he general attitude of the
    PDP-11 hobbyist communty and will be willing to re-visit the whole
    hobbyist license idea. Or maybe I just spent too much time reading
    Don Quioxte when I was younger!!

    bill

    --
    Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    University of Scranton |
    Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

  6. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    Bill Gunshannon wrote:
    > In article ,
    > ChrisQuayle writes:
    >
    >>Why do you get in such a lather about this ?. Methinks you protesteth
    >>too much :-).

    >
    >
    > Well, for one reason because being one of those who will not use
    > software illegally I was directly affected by Mentec's stopping
    > work on a Hobbyist License. I don't protest, I tell it like it is.
    > I have actually seen software piracy cases and was even notified
    > in one case that I might be called to testify in court about it.
    >



    If you have been doing most of the work to try to get hobbyist license,
    then I can see why you would be annoyed about the attitude that says
    everything should free etc. It's an abuse of any possible good will that
    might exist otherwise. Problem is that the tendency is towards open
    source software, even solaris is open source now, perhaps sets a
    precedent in some minds that everything should be, when in fact the real
    world depends on revenue to survive.

    What's that saying ? - the universe is absolutely fair and everything
    must be paid or accounted for in the end...

    Chris

  7. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article <1166293437.456616.117400@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.c om>,
    "madcrow" wrote:
    >
    >Bill Gunshannon wrote:
    >> Being a hobbyist does not give you the right to use someone else's
    >> property. I have a friend who is a TV show addict. Can he start
    >> using your VCD to tape shows, without your permission, of course.
    >> I am beginning to think maybe the RIAA is right!!
    >>
    >> bill

    >
    >I don't disagree with the fact that we have no RIGHTS to use the old
    >stuff, I'm just saying that maybe the new owners of Mentec will be more
    >willing to give us that PRIVILEGE than the former owners... If they
    >don't that will be sad, but that's life.


    Then pay for it. Make it worth Mentec's interests to offer that
    kind of license.

    /BAH

  8. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
    > In article <1166293437.456616.117400@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.c om>,
    > "madcrow" wrote:
    >
    >>Bill Gunshannon wrote:
    >>
    >>>Being a hobbyist does not give you the right to use someone else's
    >>>property. I have a friend who is a TV show addict. Can he start
    >>>using your VCD to tape shows, without your permission, of course.
    >>>I am beginning to think maybe the RIAA is right!!
    >>>
    >>>bill

    >>
    >>I don't disagree with the fact that we have no RIGHTS to use the old
    >>stuff, I'm just saying that maybe the new owners of Mentec will be more
    >>willing to give us that PRIVILEGE than the former owners... If they
    >>don't that will be sad, but that's life.

    >
    >
    > Then pay for it. Make it worth Mentec's interests to offer that
    > kind of license.
    >
    > /BAH


    To do that, we need to get some critical mass together. Assuming each
    hobbyist was willing to pay, say $100 for the right to run rsx or rt11
    on old hardware, how many would be needed to make it attractive to Mentec ?.

    The problem with stuff done just for interest is that the mindset is
    usually shoe string or no cost at all...

    Chris



  9. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    ChrisQuayle schrieb:

    >
    > The problem with stuff done just for interest is that the mindset is
    > usually shoe string or no cost at all...


    I'd say the mindset rather is "fair trade".
    Why should a hobbyist pay an arm and a leg for
    a product that hasn't been worked on for ages ?
    Or did Mentec release new versions of RSX and stuff ?
    Making people pay for no visible work isn't such
    a good business model in this case, IMHO.
    I guess that hobbyists would probably pay for media and
    shipping costs, but not for the IP holders sitting on
    a rotten corpse.
    Same goes for Ultrix, VAX/VMS and other DEC abandonware, BTW.


  10. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article ,
    ChrisQuayle wrote:
    >jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
    >> In article <1166293437.456616.117400@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.c om>,
    >> "madcrow" wrote:
    >>
    >>>Bill Gunshannon wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Being a hobbyist does not give you the right to use someone else's
    >>>>property. I have a friend who is a TV show addict. Can he start
    >>>>using your VCD to tape shows, without your permission, of course.
    >>>>I am beginning to think maybe the RIAA is right!!
    >>>>
    >>>>bill
    >>>
    >>>I don't disagree with the fact that we have no RIGHTS to use the old
    >>>stuff, I'm just saying that maybe the new owners of Mentec will be more
    >>>willing to give us that PRIVILEGE than the former owners... If they
    >>>don't that will be sad, but that's life.

    >>
    >>
    >> Then pay for it. Make it worth Mentec's interests to offer that
    >> kind of license.
    >>
    >> /BAH

    >
    >To do that, we need to get some critical mass together. Assuming each
    >hobbyist was willing to pay, say $100 for the right to run rsx or rt11
    >on old hardware, how many would be needed to make it attractive to Mentec ?.


    I'm not the one to ask. You need to ask the people who own the
    rights. Not just some random email. You write it properly just
    like any business letter.

    >
    >The problem with stuff done just for interest is that the mindset is
    >usually shoe string or no cost at all...


    Oh, bull****. People pay thousands of dollars on their interests.
    What is unusual about the computer biz is that the younger
    generations believe that they should get everything free when
    it comes to system hard/software. This is a side effect
    of mic****'s business model. People have been brought up
    to assume that software is generated out of fairy dust when
    "They" say poof.

    /BAH

  11. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article ,
    Michael Kraemer wrote:
    >ChrisQuayle schrieb:
    >
    >>
    >> The problem with stuff done just for interest is that the mindset is
    >> usually shoe string or no cost at all...

    >
    >I'd say the mindset rather is "fair trade".
    >Why should a hobbyist pay an arm and a leg for
    >a product that hasn't been worked on for ages ?


    According to Bill, this is not true. If he's done business
    with them, then the bits have changed.

    >Or did Mentec release new versions of RSX and stuff ?


    Why do they have to release new versions? That in no
    way implies that the RSX isn't "active".

    >Making people pay for no visible work isn't such
    >a good business model in this case, IMHO.


    Ah, now we come to the crux of the matter. Mentex
    has to continually add bells and whistles and bugs or
    else give their products away free. You have been
    bred, born and raised on Mic****'s business model. I suggest
    that you wean yourself. The ONLY reason the PDP-11
    stuff is so good is because we got paid to do the work. And
    customers did the paying. AS long as customers continued to
    pay, we shipped them a distribution set of software.


    >I guess that hobbyists would probably pay for media and
    >shipping costs, but not for the IP holders sitting on
    >a rotten corpse.


    If that's all you want to pay for, you will never get
    the good stuff that is still being cared for.

    >Same goes for Ultrix, VAX/VMS and other DEC abandonware, BTW.


    I would much rather have some company own this stuff than
    have it abandoned. You do not know anything about software
    monitor development and maintencance.

    /BAH



  12. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article ,
    ChrisQuayle wrote:
    >Michael Kraemer wrote:
    >> ChrisQuayle schrieb:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> The problem with stuff done just for interest is that the mindset is
    >>> usually shoe string or no cost at all...

    >>
    >>
    >> I'd say the mindset rather is "fair trade".
    >> Why should a hobbyist pay an arm and a leg for
    >> a product that hasn't been worked on for ages ?
    >> Or did Mentec release new versions of RSX and stuff ?
    >> Making people pay for no visible work isn't such
    >> a good business model in this case, IMHO.
    >> I guess that hobbyists would probably pay for media and
    >> shipping costs, but not for the IP holders sitting on
    >> a rotten corpse.
    >> Same goes for Ultrix, VAX/VMS and other DEC abandonware, BTW.
    >>

    >
    >Sorry, wrong attitude and I have to side with Bill on this. How do you
    >know that it hasn't been worked on in ages, or what their investment has
    >been over the years ?. One assumes that you don't object to paying for
    >Billyware os and packages for your pc,


    But doesn't overtly pay for mic****ware. That's why he and
    a lot of other people believe that all software should be free.
    since they cannot physically touch it, it must not cost anything
    to produce.



    >So when did you last contribute something to open source ?...


    Open sources are not free either. Since this is so new w.r.t.
    production methods, it has not gone through its aging process.

    /BAH

  13. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    Michael Kraemer wrote:
    >
    > Who said so ? Certainly not me.
    > I just pointed out that it's not people's
    > (and not my) mindset everything should be free,
    > but something which has hobbyist value should
    > also have hobbyist prices.


    Well, as a car enthusiast. I would like Ferrari to give me a car, but it
    ain't going to happen. In the end, everything for sale has a perceived
    value set by the vendor and if you want it that badly, you'll pay for
    it, otherwise do without. It's no use whinging on about how it has a low
    hobbyist value - they obviously disagree with you. Nor are they under
    any obligation under fair play, whatever, just give to you at a price
    you decide is fair. We called that the "terrible two's" when my kids
    were growing up :-).

    and yes, I know, some people know the price of everything and the value
    of nothing etc...

    Chris

  14. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article ,
    Michael Kraemer writes:
    > ChrisQuayle schrieb:
    >
    >>
    >> The problem with stuff done just for interest is that the mindset is
    >> usually shoe string or no cost at all...

    >
    > I'd say the mindset rather is "fair trade".
    > Why should a hobbyist pay an arm and a leg for
    > a product that hasn't been worked on for ages ?


    Two things here. It is your opinion that it " hasn't been worked on for
    ages". That is not necessarily true. Just because Mentec doesn't tell
    you everytime they fix something doesn't mean it isn't happening. The
    PDP-11 OSes are still viable commercial products, in use all over the world
    and being maintained by their owner. And second, why should you get to
    decide what's fair? I would like to have Porsche 911. But we have
    real low speed limits over here so it won't be as much fun as it is
    in Germany. So, I think "fair trade" should be that I only pay $20,000
    for it instead of the $60,000 Porsche is asking. Sound fair to you?
    After all, I am not going to get the full experience so why should I have
    to pay the full price?

    > Or did Mentec release new versions of RSX and stuff ?


    Numerous times since they acquired it, in particular, fixing all the
    Y2K stuff. It is only recently that Mentec stopped developing new
    PDP-11 processors.

    > Making people pay for no visible work isn't such
    > a good business model in this case, IMHO.


    Just because it isn't visible to you doesn't mean it isn't there. I'm
    sorry your not on the distribution for the internal memoes, but that's
    life.

    > I guess that hobbyists would probably pay for media and
    > shipping costs, but not for the IP holders sitting on
    > a rotten corpse.


    Even if it truly were "a rotten corpse" it would be their "rotten corpse"
    and not yours to decide on. But this just shows how little you even know
    about the situation.

    > Same goes for Ultrix, VAX/VMS and other DEC abandonware, BTW.


    And this even more. Which Ultrix? Ultrix-11 is already freely available
    and open to anyone to run on anything they want. VMS is not just a VAX
    product. It also runs on Alpha and Itanium. The code base is the same
    for all of them so it can hardly be considered "a rotten corpse". In
    addition, there is a very active hobbyist program that makes it available
    for free and not just old versions. the Itanium was recently addded to
    the program.

    There is no such thing as "abandonware". that is a term created
    specifically to let people rationalize their blatant theft of
    someone elses's property.

    bill

    --
    Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    University of Scranton |
    Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

  15. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

    > Then pay for it. Make it worth Mentec's interests to offer that
    > kind of license.


    Umm, how can you buy something not even offered? Mentec does not offer
    low-cost licenses for hobbyists. You have to pay the same
    multi-thousand dollar price wheteher you're a nerd with a surplus -11
    or two in the basement or a multi-national corporation...As far as I
    can tell, they aren't willing to negotiate on a case-by-case basis...


  16. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    ChrisQuayle schrieb:
    > Michael Kraemer wrote:
    >
    > Well, as a car enthusiast. I would like Ferrari to give me a car, but it
    > ain't going to happen.


    Oh no, not another car-OS comparison.
    At least a Ferrari has some real value,
    is faster than the others and actively
    being worked on.
    Compared to that, the stuff in question here is
    some 1950s 3-wheel 2-stroke-engine junker rotting in some
    garage, the little boys from the neighbourhood use it for their joyrides,
    but the owner still pretends it is a Ferrari and
    tries to sell it at Ferrari prices.
    It's just ridiculous.

    > In the end, everything for sale has a perceived
    > value set by the vendor and if you want it that badly, you'll pay for
    > it, otherwise do without. It's no use whinging on about how it has a low
    > hobbyist value - they obviously disagree with you.


    Funny, but if I understand the story correctly,
    they prefer to go under (with no business left at all)
    rather than lowering prices and have some business at least.
    Must be some strange branch of capitalism, indeed.

    > Nor are they under
    > any obligation under fair play, whatever, just give to you at a price
    > you decide is fair.


    I really have no idea what you are complaining about.
    On one hand you whine about not having affordable hobbyist licenses,
    on the other hand you defend a greedy company.
    This just doesn't fit together.
    Plus you accuse other people always wanting everything for free,
    which isn't true, BTW.



  17. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    On 17 Dec 2006 09:34:53 -0800, "madcrow"
    wrote:

    >jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
    >
    >> Then pay for it. Make it worth Mentec's interests to offer that
    >> kind of license.

    >
    >Umm, how can you buy something not even offered? Mentec does not offer
    >low-cost licenses for hobbyists. You have to pay the same
    >multi-thousand dollar price wheteher you're a nerd with a surplus -11
    >or two in the basement or a multi-national corporation...As far as I
    >can tell, they aren't willing to negotiate on a case-by-case basis...


    Yea, more. In my experience (and in the experience of many other
    people who have tried to talk to them, not just 'hobbyists'), they are
    simply unresponsive to ALL enquiries - you might as well send it to
    /dev/null

    Mike
    --
    http://www.corestore.org
    'As I walk along these shores
    I am the history within'

  18. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    In article ,
    Michael Kraemer writes:
    > ChrisQuayle schrieb:
    >> Michael Kraemer wrote:
    >>
    >> Well, as a car enthusiast. I would like Ferrari to give me a car, but it
    >> ain't going to happen.

    >
    > Oh no, not another car-OS comparison.
    > At least a Ferrari has some real value,


    So we are back to opinion again. Personally, I wouldn't take a Ferrari
    as a gift. Well, I would, but then I would immediately sell it on Ebay
    and buy a real car.

    > is faster


    Kind of useless in a country with 65 MPH speed limits. My Miata can do
    140 and gets much better gas mileage.

    > than the others and actively
    > being worked on.


    As are the PDP-11 OSes. Three strikes.

    > Compared to that, the stuff in question here is
    > some 1950s 3-wheel 2-stroke-engine junker rotting in some
    > garage,


    Once again, matter of opinion. Some jobs don't call for GUI's and
    Windows isn't the universal answer.

    > the little boys from the neighbourhood use it for their joyrides,
    > but the owner still pretends it is a Ferrari and
    > tries to sell it at Ferrari prices.


    I have seen people sell 80 year old cars for 100's of thousands of
    dollars. To me, it's just a old used car, but the owner sets the
    price and the people who want it pay that price. Non one comes in
    to Barret-Jackson and says, "That's just an old car. I'll give you
    $50 for it."

    > It's just ridiculous.


    No, ridiculous is thinking the buyer somehow gets to set the price
    rather than the seller.

    >
    >> In the end, everything for sale has a perceived
    >> value set by the vendor and if you want it that badly, you'll pay for
    >> it, otherwise do without. It's no use whinging on about how it has a low
    >> hobbyist value - they obviously disagree with you.

    >
    > Funny, but if I understand the story correctly,
    > they prefer to go under (with no business left at all)
    > rather than lowering prices and have some business at least.
    > Must be some strange branch of capitalism, indeed.


    You keep saying they have no business. This even though people keep
    telling you they are doing just fine. You seem to be have totally
    missed the fact that it wasn't the American part of Mentec that was
    just sold. The part that owns the PDP-11 OSes is doing just fine.
    Sorry to disappoint you.

    >
    >> Nor are they under
    >> any obligation under fair play, whatever, just give to you at a price
    >> you decide is fair.

    >
    > I really have no idea what you are complaining about.
    > On one hand you whine about not having affordable hobbyist licenses,
    > on the other hand you defend a greedy company.


    Asking for a return on your investment isn't necessarily greed. All
    business do it. Do you think 15 minutes worth of ehat passes for music
    today is worth $20? Is 90 minutes worth of "I Love Lucy" worth $20?
    (I'll give you a hint, I don't think either is worth a warm bucket of
    spit.) But the seller gets to set the price, not the buyer. You have
    no idea what the investments needed to bring the product to market were
    so calling it greed because you aren;t willing to pay the price is just
    plain ridiculous.

    > This just doesn't fit together.
    > Plus you accuse other people always wanting everything for free,
    > which isn't true, BTW.


    Most want it for free, which is why so many people have no problem just
    taking and running it contrary to the legal requirement for a license.
    You may not want it for free, but you want the owner to sell it to you
    at your price. Try that in Sears, or Burger King or pretty much any
    business in your town (beyond the local flea market, at least). See
    how far you get.

    bill

    --
    Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    University of Scranton |
    Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

  19. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

    jmfbahciv@aol.com spake the secret code
    thusly:

    >Oh, bull****. People pay thousands of dollars on their interests.
    >What is unusual about the computer biz is that the younger
    >generations believe that they should get everything free when
    >it comes to system hard/software. This is a side effect
    >of mic****'s business model. [...]


    I was with you up until that last point. It has nothing to do with
    Microsoft and in fact this attitude isn't specific to computers and
    isn't unique to the current times. A similar sentiment has been
    expressed about every new "young generation" to come along since
    people have been complaining.

    I know its popular, trendy and fashionable to bash Microsoft and blame
    them for all that is considered bad in the world, but my bull****
    detector went straight off the scale when you tried to lay this one at
    Microsoft's feet.
    --
    "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download


    Legalize Adulthood!

  20. Re: Mentec US is gone!

    [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

    ChrisQuayle spake the secret code
    thusly:

    >So when did you last contribute something to open source ?...


    Personally I've contributed odds and ends over the years, particularly
    in the late 80s/early 90s when I was doing a lot of unix crap.

    Nowadays I contribute stuff for Windows, in particular a .NET
    interoperability library for the Win32 MSI API. Lately I've been
    hacking on fractint to update the code base to a more event-driven
    modern application architecture.
    --
    "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download


    Legalize Adulthood!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast