Slashdot Mirror

Yeah but Internet radio (as in independently owned) may be going away too. See the other article on arstechnica about it. It could turn into a subscription based service to recoup for the increase. I believe it applies to stations that only broadcast indie (unsigned stuff). Let's hope not.

What you're failing to take into account is that Microsoft have a paid shill editing Wikipedia for them.

OOXML is not open, see the list of objections. Also ask yourself: if Microsoft wanted to use an open file format, why didn't they use ODF? They had plenty of time to implement it within Office 2007 and were asked to be part of ODF's development. Firstly the ignored it, now that it's gaining traction they're trying to destroy it with a competing 'standard'.

I posted about the issue earlier: here and you can read an AVALANCHE about the issue at this Ars Technica thread. I linked to it elsewhere in this thread, as it's as much detail as anyone could want on the subject of an xMac and why Apple doesn't produce one (or should produce one).

This is among the most insightful comments I've read in this thread, and completely true; it's also part of the reason Apple is unlikely to make spectacular marketshare gains. The company just can't ignore such a massive swath of the market and expect to really break out. To get more perspective on why people think this is and why it is unlikely to change, read some of this massive thread on the subject of the mythical "xMac," as it's been dubbed.

To be sure, Apple is gaining ground, but they're so far from even being a significant threat to Microsoft in terms of OSes that it's almost laughable. The most significant threat Apple poses is by making it necessary for website designers and others to test in Safari and what not; when MS alternatives hit critical mass, then MS is in trouble. That's unlikely to happen from Apple alone or even Apple + Linux; in addition, all Microsoft has to do to kill Apple is stop producing Office for OS X.

Besides, while Apple does make more money per machine, Gateway also sells high-end Xeon workstations and the like. What would be more interesting is to see how many high-margin machines Dell sells in comparison to Apple -- but I'd be willing to bet Dell sells a larger absolute number of them, even if Apple sells more on a percentage basis. Finally, some of the topics raised in an earlier thread about Apple in the enterprise may be worth reading because they apply here too.

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/nano.ars/3

To be fair, the screen (which had previously been damaged) was destroyed in the process.

Hmmm...gee, i dunno...maybe because threatening someone with great harm if they don't pay up is a Mafia-like racketeering/protection/extortion scheme?

Also, because the courts are finally beginning to recognize that having an IP address is pretty flimsy evidence to prove an an individual has committed copyright infringement maybe?

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061127-8296 .html

Experts rate Wikipedia's accuracy higher than non-experts

I won't be your google but here is one article:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070115-8616 .html

[...] competively priced [...] (sic)

This is insane. The base mini is $600 without a mouse, keyboard, or monitor. Adding those peripherals from Apple brings it closer to $1200. Adding the mouse/keyboard from Apple and a sensibly priced monitor from Dell still brings it up to $800 - $1000. Adding enough RAM to make it usable raises the price further still. Even then it's hobbled by a 2.5" laptop HD that doesn't performs much worse than a standard 3.5" desktop drive.

Read the rest of that thread to see why the mini is basically there for niche users or to encourage an upsell to the iMacs.

Still, the mini does make Apple a little bit more competitive, but it's far from perfect for enterprise desktops.

I'm also not sure your generalizations fly. From the board I read -- Ars Technica's -- most people who *do* actually manage Macs in large environments haven't seen much Improvement. See, e.g., here and here and here and here for a variety of threads discussing the issue. Every time OS X.n+1 is about to arrive, so do threads wondering if this is the time for OS X in the enterprise. Look in particular for the posts of a guy named dhaveconfig, who manages a uni setup in Australia and is well-versed in Apple's various enterprise failings.

you get dedicated Apple representatives for your account. Onsite service contracts are available for server systems. Apple has always had self-servicing programs for enterprises, although the investment in spares can be a bit high.

This is true, but you STILL have to jump through Apple's hoops and you STILL don't get many of the things I cited in my original post. To be sure, Apple is looking better in the enterprise than they have in the past, but that's more an accident than anything else, and more a result of dividends from their other strategies. And "better" in this circumstance just means, "not as abysmal as they used to be," which is hardly an accolade.

I'm also not sure your generalizations fly. From the board I read -- Ars Technica's -- most people who *do* actually manage Macs in large environments haven't seen much Improvement. See, e.g., here and here and here and here for a variety of threads discussing the issue. Every time OS X.n+1 is about to arrive, so do threads wondering if this is the time for OS X in the enterprise. Look in particular for the posts of a guy named dhaveconfig, who manages a uni setup in Australia and is well-versed in Apple's various enterprise failings.

you get dedicated Apple representatives for your account. Onsite service contracts are available for server systems. Apple has always had self-servicing programs for enterprises, although the investment in spares can be a bit high.

This is true, but you STILL have to jump through Apple's hoops and you STILL don't get many of the things I cited in my original post. To be sure, Apple is looking better in the enterprise than they have in the past, but that's more an accident than anything else, and more a result of dividends from their other strategies. And "better" in this circumstance just means, "not as abysmal as they used to be," which is hardly an accolade.

I'm also not sure your generalizations fly. From the board I read -- Ars Technica's -- most people who *do* actually manage Macs in large environments haven't seen much Improvement. See, e.g., here and here and here and here for a variety of threads discussing the issue. Every time OS X.n+1 is about to arrive, so do threads wondering if this is the time for OS X in the enterprise. Look in particular for the posts of a guy named dhaveconfig, who manages a uni setup in Australia and is well-versed in Apple's various enterprise failings.

you get dedicated Apple representatives for your account. Onsite service contracts are available for server systems. Apple has always had self-servicing programs for enterprises, although the investment in spares can be a bit high.

This is true, but you STILL have to jump through Apple's hoops and you STILL don't get many of the things I cited in my original post. To be sure, Apple is looking better in the enterprise than they have in the past, but that's more an accident than anything else, and more a result of dividends from their other strategies. And "better" in this circumstance just means, "not as abysmal as they used to be," which is hardly an accolade.

I'm also not sure your generalizations fly. From the board I read -- Ars Technica's -- most people who *do* actually manage Macs in large environments haven't seen much Improvement. See, e.g., here and here and here and here for a variety of threads discussing the issue. Every time OS X.n+1 is about to arrive, so do threads wondering if this is the time for OS X in the enterprise. Look in particular for the posts of a guy named dhaveconfig, who manages a uni setup in Australia and is well-versed in Apple's various enterprise failings.

you get dedicated Apple representatives for your account. Onsite service contracts are available for server systems. Apple has always had self-servicing programs for enterprises, although the investment in spares can be a bit high.

This is true, but you STILL have to jump through Apple's hoops and you STILL don't get many of the things I cited in my original post. To be sure, Apple is looking better in the enterprise than they have in the past, but that's more an accident than anything else, and more a result of dividends from their other strategies. And "better" in this circumstance just means, "not as abysmal as they used to be," which is hardly an accolade.

You can't get enterprise level support. I.e. next day overnight shipping for parts, 24-hour tech high-level support, etc. Getting a damn power supply should be easily done online a la the stuff Dell and HP offer. Speaking of that, it's also damn near impossible to get an online system apart from the basic Apple store.

No xMac. The Mini helps in this regard, but Apple still doesn't offer a basic tower.

Exchange client/server. It's not good enough until it's perfect.

Uncertainty regarding OS X and hardware. The enterprise doesn't like not knowing what Steve Jobs is going to pull out of his hat in six weeks when you need new hardware today.

The first point is probably the most important, and the article doesn't really address how things have changed. Ever since 10.1 people have speculated Apple is finally pushing into the enterprise... maybe this time it will be. I'm skeptical given Apple's past intransigence. And I'm posting from a PowerBook.

Biology Wiki
is an article about this demo of a biology wiki

So, there seems to be a movement in open source biology.

Region Coding seems to be the future for HD-DVD, however. Save your current player if you have one.

Your not getting this trailer park. Chances of you understanding the whole picture is slim. Despite hundreds of posts on slash dot of charges made by the RIAA and cases that were thrown out because the charges where false or inflated. You still don't understand the concept of Innocent until proven guilty. Its sad for all those people you will pass judgment on during your lifetime. Y'all pass me some more chewing tobacco and hang that man.

The RIAA tried to sue Gertrude Walton for file sharing 2005. Problem Gertrude had been dead for over a year. I know trailer you can come up with a good scenario of how Gertrude was file sharing from the grave. After all we both know how infallible the US judiciary process is and if the RIAA says Gertrude is guilty then guilty she is.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/05/riaa_sues_ the_dead/

A family in Rome, GA, (one of the 235 defendants) was very surprised when the local newspaper contacted them to ask about the file sharing lawsuit in which they were implicated. Problem they didn't own an Internet connection. I know trailer, guilty for living a building that had file sharing going on. Hey would someone play the banjo and dress my sister up real nice.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060424-6662 .html

The RIAA was offering false amnesty program for a while but discontinued it when they got sued for fraudulent business practices. Wait a second these guys are just a trade association why would they be luring confessions from folks falsly. This must be another lie by yours truly, the person you never met but cast judgment on after his first post. The banjos play in the back ground.

http://blogs.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/001435.php
or
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,112428-page,1/ar ticle.html

RIAA threatens to sue a 12 year old unless the parents pay $2000 dollars. I know trailer park $2000 bucks is a small price to pay to keep your children safe. Those RIAA folks are just misunderstood, they are just trying to give that little girls a lesson she'll keep with her for the rest of her life. Man don't y'all just love those RIAA guys they are just swell. Golly trailer I hope you don't have a inquisitive 12 year old. But hey your a smart guy who can afford a computer and Internet connection I am sure you can afford a measly 2 grand.

http://news.com.com/RIAA+settles+with+12-year-old+ girl/2100-1027_3-5073717.html

Hey did ya notice trailer how the RIAA doesn't use the word stealing in any of its written public documents. It uses a word called copyright infringement. Thats odd don't y'all think that we'd be using the word stealing that means legally something else. I wonder where we got that stealing word from. Thats a lot of thinking us regualr folk shouldn't be to concerned with don't ya'll think.

http://www.riaa.com/issues%5CcleanSlate.asp

Trailer you and the RIAA are just swell folks. I don't know what I was thinking.

Despite a less-than-promising start for Sony's UMD movie format, Americans have now purchased over half a million of the half-dollar-sized discs since its April release, according to one industry estimate. In comparison, the ubiquitous DVD took a year to reach the 500,000 mark back in 1997. There are no formal statistics to show what tops UMD sales charts, but going by Amazon's figures, Sin City leads all other releases by a comfortable margin.

At the Entertainment Media Expo in Hollywood, Sony executives touted the success of their UMD format. The company said it has already sold 9 million games on UMD and 8.2 million movies. Sony is currently producing 200,000 UMDs a day and future capacity is expected to be 500,000 per day. Sony expects videos to account for more than 60 percent of all UMD sales in the a few years, with an expected 130 million UMDs being sold in 2008.

YouTube deals fall apart, the center cannot hold

Big content producers are going to want to retain control over their own content, obviously. And it's so easy to do so with the internet. You don't need youtube if you can develop your own video site with flash player and all in six months.

What youtube should do is offer to license its software or host the content, and charge for licensing and/or hosting. It can slap ads on those videos that aren't paying for either service, but not for their paying customers. Licensing their software should also include the stipulation that youtube can link to their content or content page via search results.

Otherwise, youtube would only be good for homemade videos. Which is a large enough market in and of itself. But don't expect big content producers with their own means of putting their videos on the web to sign on.

First, yeah, Dave Girard knows and uses Aperture. Second, the algorithm CoreImage uses to choose its rendering path might be suboptimal. Or perhaps the non-CoreImage parts of Aperture are just badly written. Whatever the reason, by all accounts Aperture is a pretty slow piece of software.

Ars Technica explains the "yellow line" technology (and other related football tech) in this article: http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/firstandte n.ars

Why not just keep the libraries in the application package?.... On the mac, the OS knows about the libraries contained within application packages, and if a newer version exists within an app, than exists within /library/, then it will start using that library for ALL apps that need it, not just the app that contained the library. check out this ars review of mac application packages: http://arstechnica.com/reviews/2q00/macos-x-dp4/ma cos-x-dp4-2.html

1 TV/Movies/Music $222,791
2 Lawyers/Law Firms $117,450

In 2002, he helped to sponsor a bill that would have given music and movie companies the right to disrupt peer-to-peer networks and even hack into the computers of suspected file-swappers...
He has been a big supporter of broadcast flags and was also behind legislation that directed the FBI to produce a special FBI warning, complete with seal that could be sent to suspected copyright violators...
But his total take from entertainment companies has actually decreased in recent years. In the 2002 cycle, he was the number two recipient of entertainment industry contributions. In 2006, he fell to eighth, though he was still the number one recipient in the House (apparently, donating to Senators is now the way to get things done).

You're not the first person to make this request. If you want to read an inordinate amount of commentary and contention on the issue, look at this thread at the Ars Mac forum. Yes, I realize that it's like asking for a piece of chocolate and being dumped in the vat where it's made, but there's a lot of information and speculation there.

Some big examples? PS2, Nintendo Gamecube, Wii, Xbox 360. All these consoles use eDRAM for their GPU's on-chip framebuffers to enhance their performance, and that goes back to at least the year 2000 when the PS2 came out.

Some will be quick to say "no, the Nintendo consoles use 1T-SRAM, not DRAM". Yeah, right, but even 1T-SRAM (despite its name) is a form of embedded-DRAM.

Ars Technica has some really in-depth coverage on the letter.

This is STILL Just a BITMAP Composer, using OpenGL to store and render Textures on a simple Polygon surface for each Window.

Sorry, you're wrong. You're thinking of Quartz Extreme, since then apple has introduced Quartz 2D Extreme (what a terrible name). Here's (for example) an ars article:

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/ 14

OS X 10.4 renders 2D vectors with the GPU.

You're right that they have different architectures. The mac is still 2D bitmaps (though drawing is GPU-accelerated), whereas vista has gone for a more ambitious display list thing. It'll be interesting to see how they match up over the next few years.

HD has big headstart in p0rn. Sony would not duplicate blu-ray p0rn disks while HD would.

"Certainly, the game will run on some Vista machines, but perhaps not all. This means that we will not be able to promise you that the game will run on your hardware with the Vista OS. If you encounter problems running the game with Vista, unfortunately, we will be unable to help you.

We plan to officially support the Vista OS by the time the first Service Pack is released, which is expected sometime in the second half of this year."

Can you blame them after hearing even Nvidia couldn't ship some drivers yet?
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070206-8784 .html

Jobs is an arrogant control-freak, and he often exaggerates when talking about the coolness of Apple products or their potential - but he doesn't strike me as a liar. In fact, he is quite earnest in his own way. Do you have any evidence of him lying?

No, but I read and watch almost nothing he says either. I bet I could find something if I tried.

I don't see what refusing to license Fairplay has to do with wanting to be DRM-free.

You said in your previous post "When [Gates] says he opposes DRM, he probably means he opposes DRM that Microsoft doesn't control." Again, how's that different from Jobs wanting to control FairPlay?

Licensing Fairplay would make the DRM even worse.

How? By not locking iTunes customers into iPods?

So, Jobs has to include DRM, as the deals with the RIAA and labels demanded it.

And the MPAA would have demanded some degree of DRM for next-gen DVDs to play on Windows.

It's strange that you say he "fought tooth and nail" to keep other people from licensing iTunes. Who was he fighting?

Hmm, Norway (which ruled FairPlay illegal in that country), France (including saying that a law that would require them to license FairPlay was "state-sponsored piracy"), The Netherlands, Germany, and increasingly others. (The first two are the best examples.)

From what I can see, Apple simply said "No, we aren't going to license iTunes. End of story." No fighting involved. After all, it's Apple's property, they have no obligation to license it to anybody. So, why would there be a tooth and nail fight?

Interesting that you don't have a problem with Apple trying to retain control of their DRM but you seem to have a problem with the words you put into Gates's mouth about not liking DRM MS doesn't control.

I imagine that the prices are very carefully calculated to yield the maximum amount of profit (feel free to correct me if anyone has statistics to prove otherwise).

I couldn't have said it better myself. Of course, this ignores the concept of a "fair" price. But since the word fair is such a difficult word to pin down, I'll have to give it my best shot.
There is the model of competitive pricing, which is more or less built on the cost of selling. When you go the grocery store to buy your dozen eggs, you can see they're not very expensive; a dollar at most in most areas. I would say that is relatively in line with how much it costs to get the eggs there, with just enough left over to make the grocer 'feel like' putting them there, and the farmer to sell them.
Now there's the darker side. I feel like I first became aware of this concept at my local amusement park, with the obviously jacked up food prices. It's $2.50 for the cup of french fries, which after cost of goods and wages, probably set them back 45 cents at most. I use this example not only because it's the perfect example of monopoly pricing, but also because there's a (relatively) fair market price waiting outside at your local fast food joint. 99 cents for more or less the same product.

I think consumers subtly realize when they're getting screwed. Wendy's doesn't have access to a pricing model of "do you get your food or don't you", they're stuck with "get it here or get it elsewhere". The amusement park definitely realizes you can't get it elsewhere, and the prices show it. People buy, of course, because it's usually a pain to leave and come back, and a day with hungry->whiney kids is hardly 'amusing'.
Ok, so maybe I should be thankful that my local amusement park is offering me the choice to not go hungry, but I know I'm getting screwed. They're making their extra buck off of my back, and I'm well aware of it. The same goes with the record labels. They keep the copyrights for the works that 'their' artists produce, so they don't have to fight against someone else selling the same music. Thanks to their convenient cartels, they don't even have to compete with each other over similar genres. The result? You guessed it. Overinflated prices. Again, this concept of a "fair" price is a difficult one to pin down, but I would certainly say it's less than the $12.75 we're stuck with now. Even 99 cents per song for the ones I like is a tough sell. I've been on a farm before (well, at least visited one), and I have a small idea of what a pain in the ass it is to raise chickens. I feel like a dollar is a pretty modest price to pay for 12 of them, actually.

Now there's the RIAA. Of course, their model is based on a certain amount of uncertainty of whether or not an artist will succeed, so it's a bit harder to gett a spot price (as opposed to measuring the effort it takes to raise chickens for eggs). Well, they claim that it's a lot, but in my experience, whenever a company is being secretive about their pricing, I've found that something fishy is usually going on. Music consumers (and artists... the monopoly works both ways) have been getting screwed for a long time, and it's no secret. Now, somebody comes along with a way to screw them back, and they cry foul? Please. I don't want to hear it.

What the Napster era really produced wasn't a country full of pirates. It was a new fair price. Now, the music industry actually has to compete with something. And it sucks for them. Bye-bye amusement park profits. Hello market price. But back to this

Actually that is exactly what they tried with PERFORM Act. Greed knows no bounds.

How long before some lobbyist convinces the government to make it mandatory to use an *AA approved protocol/operating system which can be used to ensure that their IP 'rights' aren't being violated??

There is a iTunes wreckage story on frontpage today, just check the comments. People still doesn't believe MS could be -that- evil and shameless to break competitors product on purpose.

Yes they can be and they are. Careful dealing with them.

Also there is currently a story that BBC will lock down the potential big business, "on demand paid downloads" to Windows. Again, if you mention an exclusive agreement which they did with MSFT just months ago, you will be labelled conspiracy theorist. Risking to go off-topic, here is the deal, I wonder will we read it in Slashdot "new mails leaked" story some years later?
http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2007/2/2 /6872

I mean the "real" story... Just like these.

Yeah, let's follow Microsoft's lead. Release a product. Have it not be compatible with your upcoming OS. Wait 1 month to fix it. This is considering that they make both products and have insider knowledge. Not to mention that they have access to api's well before developers are granted access. And this is assuming they didn't include any breakme code to wreck iTunes. I know for a fact that MS breaks iTunes. Mine was working perfectly and then after a Windows XP Update, sound would no longer work properly on it. It would produce a loud, irritating screech. But, surprisingly every other media player and music player worked just fine. Geez, thanks Microshaft. -------- December 20, 2006 @ 7:11PM - posted by Matt Mondok Microsoft fixes Zune, Vista compatibility issues The Zune is finally ready for Windows Vista. In a 22 MB update (v1.2) released Tuesday, Microsoft fixed compatibility issues that existed between the portable music player and Microsoft's new operating system. Microsoft employee and Zune team member Cesar Menendez gave a very brief overview of the update on his blog yesterday. "Today we're issuing a 22 MB update to make Zune compatible with Windows Vista. The update also improves the Zune software installation process, addressing the issues that some of the known issues users reported." The Zune's incompatibility with Windows Vista has been heavily criticized since the device was launched last month. Although Vista is not even available to a broad range of consumers as of yet, members of the online media have ripped Microsoft for shipping the Zune without support for its soon-to-be flagship operating system. When the reports of problems with Vista first hit, Microsoft pondered waiting until January to release a software update that would make the Zune "Vista ready." Luckily for Microsoft, someone in the company was smart enough to get this fix out early and avoid a possible mess of problems by releasing it right around January 30, 2007. http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2006 /12/20/6362

That "bad file format" you are knocking is the compsiting and rendering format for the Macintosh OS X Quartz user interface.

See this: http://arstechnica.com/reviews/1q00/macos-x-gui/ma cos-x-gui-4.html

This was the natural extrapolation from DPS - display PostScript - used on the NeXT and original SunOS NeWS.

There is a difference between crappy rendering implementation and crappy model.

Forget writing How about first giving a grammar for formulae? How about just a list of available operators or functions?

This has nothing to do with the ODF file format.

Since you can't give me a complete syntax or list of valid functions just by looking at the ODF spec, how are you going to write a spreadsheet that works with anything else?

By downloading the openformula spec?

If you want to know what a formula looks like you need to download another 200+ page spec (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php? wg_abbrev=office-formula).

Have yourself a nice big cookie

If you want to know how to draw mathematical text you have to download the 541 page MathML spec (http://www.w3.org/TR/MathML2/). If you want to be able to want to be able to have drawings on your spreadsheet you need to get the 719 page SVG spec (which is 13 pages LONGER than the original ODFv1.0 spec)!

For an SC clone? Let's not ignore the reality of the situation, Mozilla tri-license and existence of XULRunner either.

> The Mac today is far more popular than it ever was in the pre-BSD Mac OS days.

Actually the Mac was relatively more popular in the early 1990s than it is today, see http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/total-shar e.ars/10

Absolutely, positively, INCORRECT. Sony did not SELL 1.8m PS3's...they SHIPPED 1.8 million PS3's. Many of them are sitting in stores, right next to the ones that were returned by many eBayers unopened because they eBay sales tanked. THEY ARE NOT SELLING. Period. End of story. Sitting there collecting dust. They are not coming in and going right out and then being restocked - they are just sitting there. You honestly are the first person I've seen with the balls to argue otherwise, because arguing anything but is like saying New Coke wasn't so bad.

Bollocks. Clearly they were sold and clearly Sony have manufactured and sold many thousands more since. Besides, MS claimed 10 million sold too, but guess what - they meant shipped as well and went through all kinds of verbal gymnastics to explain why sold meant shipped. Either way that's the only metric these companies have the ability to actually say with certainty. Just accept it and move on.

Dude, I'm sorry, but I guess we just can't finish the conversation, because you are simply talkin' crazy and now you are bringing up whole other topics when your basic knowledge seems to be extremely adverse to reality. You obviously do not follow the industry, because the facts at the base of your reasoning are simply WRONG. There is no other word for it. I mean, you must not even read /. regularly. That's fine and all - not everyone needs to stay on top of such things, but if you are going to tell someone they are "completely incorrect" or that their simple facts are "bollucks", you really should know what the hell you are talking about.

Sony announced after Christmas that it had SHIPPED 1.8 million units. Go to their website - look at the press release. The wording was very exact. They did not SELL 1.8 million units. This is fact reported by every gaming site and many mainstream publications.

There have been dozens of articles about how poorly all this has been going for the PS3. Either you are blind or you do not read.

Here is an article about retailers having PS3's sitting on their shelves for a week or more (70% in this case!).

Here is an article (with nifty graphs and everything!) that explains how the PS3 on eBay market CRASHED...before CHRISTMAS! It was so bad that scalpers were returning them to the stores because they weren't worth the bother to ship because they were all over retail stores and, again, no one was buying them (nor are they now).

Here is an article that confirms that Sony shipped 1m units to the US, and less than 2/3 of them sold. You will also note that this article is also about analysts cutting predictions for the PS3 based on it's bad sales - there are again dozens on the topic if you search.

Finally, here's yet another article detailing just how slow demand is. Stores are stocked - people don't want 'em.

I didn't mean for this to turn into a PS3 sucks debate, but man, you are just so ill informed about this topic one can't communicate with you on the others. My only point, from the beginning, is that PS3 sales are not going to win this format war. You have gone on and on like a friggin' press release about all this peripheral bullshit regarding the PS3, and how I don't understand "what Sony intends the PS3 to be" - we can't have that discussion while you are so ill informed about how the PS3 is really faring in the marketplace.

You'll also notice that those articles are from a selection of times - one before XMAS, one right after, one in early Jan, one last week. Before you start saying that "X-site is wrong, blah blah" I encourage you to seek out the other news stories out there abou

Where did those concepts come from?

Apple's Lisa.

That's where they first saw the light of day in any form.

Xerox didn't invent everything - Apple greatly extended the original GUI concept, adding pull-down menus, full system icons and much more.

A bit of history can be found at ArsTechnica...
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/gui.ars/3
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/gui.ars/4

Where did those concepts come from?

Apple's Lisa.

That's where they first saw the light of day in any form.

Xerox didn't invent everything - Apple greatly extended the original GUI concept, adding pull-down menus, full system icons and much more.

A bit of history can be found at ArsTechnica...
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/gui.ars/3
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/gui.ars/4

ARS Technica doesn't buy it either but The New York Times cited six major issues with Vista mostly dug out by a security firm. They've since taken the reference to the article away so you'll need to dig it out if you're curious.

I don't see Microsoft dropping their premium pricing, if anything I would expect a software bundle or a new version with HD-DVD, HDMI and a bigger harddrive. The component cost of the 360 is now cheaper than the sale price: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061116-8239 .html Microsoft can cut prices to drive sales, or they can sit and approach profitability, or they can aim for higher value at the same pricing. Dropping their price would be a statement that their console has less value than the PS3. When compared to the PS3 and its current software library, they have no incentive to drop their price until the PS3 is cheaper or actually outperforming them in the content department.

Moore's Law originally stated that the transistor count on chips will double every 24 months, although it was later refined to 18. It isn't even really a "law" in the sense of, say, gravity; it's just an observation. What it has to do with the rest of your post isn't clear.

They simply have no way of knowing.

That's always a problem with OEM OS loads.This Quick Reference Should clear up some issues for those who are not already aware.

I always figure in a new OEM copy whenever a board goes. You'll waste more time than is neccessary to try to save $139.00, but you saved a lot of money buying that replacement board from NewEgg. It sucks but other than sending it to (in this case EMachines) neither Microsoft -or- EMachines have no idea what happened to your hardware that your OEM OS is tied to.

So when that page says "Receive an Express Upgrade to Windows Vista when you buy a qualifying PC running Windows XP," they are actually referring to an OEM versions of Windows that was preinstalled by the system builder that built that "qualifying PC." They don't mention OEM versions of Windows because that page was meant for normal retail buyers, not system builders, and retail PCs have OEM versions of Windows preinstalled. They don't mention standalone retail boxed versions of Windows XP because they don't qualify (you're supposed to buy a "system").

My description is pretty confusing. A better description of OEM can be found from this Ars Techinca article: Buying OEM versions of Windows Vista: the facts

I hate linking to an example at an online store, but here's one: Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 SP2b w/Upgrade Coupon for Vista - OEM

I like Newegg, but that page for XP MCE OEM does not say anything about the difference between OEM versions and retail versions. It just has the letters 'OEM' tacked on to the name of the product.

Possible drawbacks:

• OEM versions of Windows (which cost much less than retail) do not get phone/e-mail support from MS. I assume this is not a big deal to Slashdot readres because we should know how to use MS's support web pages, knowledge base, and Microsoft Update. However, it's worth mentioning if you're planning on installing it for a novice friend.
• OEM versions can only be used on one computer and cannot be "moved" to your next computer. MS has been pretty lax on this requirement for XP (just call them and they'll re-activate for you), but I've read that they might be more strict with Vista (I hope not).
• It looks like upgrade versions of Vista will require a previous version to be installed before you can install Vista. Previous to Vista, upgrade versions of Windows only required the user to briefly insert a previous version's CD. If you have a RAID setup, this might mean you need to go through XP's shitty RAID setup before installing Vista (which fixes this RAID issue). Note that, contrary to some news headlines, Vista upgrade versions will allow "clean" installs (format hard drive and start clean).

Is that the same WSJ article that quotes that sony is not allowing porn? If so they need to call up sony and do some fact checking. Would have taken a couple of hours TOPS. It was a internet rumor and was hogwash. The major press studios are saying 'no we dont do porn go to your normal people'. The normal people are usually flybynight and do not have BluRay setup yet. As HD-DVD was a small change to the process and BluRay was a major change.

But think about this 800k total sales of BOTH hd-dvd and bluray at the end of dec. EXCLUDING PS3 HD-DVD is winning. Including it and BluRay is stomping it. http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070115-8625 .html. And by all accounts sony has stated that they have not met their numbers the numbers they have hit have been at least impressive for a next gen dvd format...