Slashdot Mirror
ITC Judge Calls For US Xbox Import Ban
symbolset writes "In the long running dispute between Motorola and Microsoft, Judge David Shaw of the ITC recommended Monday an import ban on Xbox 360 S consoles, as they are found to infringe Motorola's patents (PDF). The judge also ordered Microsoft post a bond of 7 percent of the retail price of all unsold U.S. Xbox inventory. The decision will go to the ITC's board of commissioners, who will either uphold the recommendation or overturn it. 'Microsoft argued that Shaw's exclusion order does not serve the public interest because it would leave consumers of video game consoles with only two options to satisfy their needs: the Sony Playstation and the Nintendo Wii. Shaw rejected that argument, finding that the public interest in enforcing intellectual property rights outweighs any potential economic impact on video game console buyers.'"
This follows news last week of Microsoft winning an import ban on Motorola's Android devices.
This could wind up being a great way to force a compromise.
Just keep shilling, account-of-the-day man.
There goes Apple again - litigating rather than inno... What's that? Not Apple? Oh... Awkward...
Both sides are assholes on this one. They seriously need to overhaul the US patent system, the balance has been tipped (for a long time) to where it stifles innovation way, way more than it fosters it.
About the only things that deserve patents are fundamental discoveries and drugs that are unique and cost hundreds of millions to develop and test. And even then, just provide some kind of "formula patent" that only lasts 5-6 years.
Most patents are fundamentally flawed because they rely on a small leap from someone else's existing work. Sure, if you just step outside the box and totally invent zero point energy in your mad scientist lab you should get a patent and make $5 trillion from it. But most "inventions" are just trifling little bullshit extensions of something that exists already.
Maybe the politicians will notice that the patent system is fundamentally broken when it finally gets to the point that nothing can be sold in the US any more (the Mutually Assured Destruction part of the current ongoing patent nuclear war)
Yeah, right...
Well, Microsoft won an import ban against Motorola for a patent on "generating meeting requests", so I'd say turnabout is fair play, in this case.
Although you are right about the damages, in a way: how are all those red-ringed XBOX 360s supposed to get replaced now? *ducks*
Google is evil.
Ah, right. Let me check: timestamp of post matches that of article, 4 post history all on Google/MS discussions (all today). Oh look, a shill!
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
Can't we all just get along?
Yeah, sure, blame Google. After all they acquired control over Motorola yesterday so they must be responsible for this ruling which came out 2 days ago.
Do you really think it's a good ban to prevent all motorola android devices from being imported because they can be used to organize a meeting ? An eye for an eye, bitches.
unfortunately, turnabout play does nothing for the customer or the nation.
Good-bye
"Microsoft argued that Shaw's exclusion order does not serve the public interest because it would leave consumers of video game consoles with only two options to satisfy their needs"
Bah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Microsoft sure has some huge balls.
The ITC has determined that just about every product out there violates some patent or other, so to play it safe, no products will be allowed into the United Staes ever again.
Well maybe if Microsoft didn't want to be victims of broken patent law, they should have done something about it... like lobbying to fix the patent system. Corporations are good at lobbying about stuff they care about and Microsoft is no exception - they both lobby for what they want and they've also exploited the broken patent system when it suited them in the past.
The public won't fix the patent system, politicians only listen to the corporate wallets today. So let's make bad laws work against corporations and then maybe these corporations will try to change the laws.
Apple, Microsoft, Sony, Motorla and others should all be victimized by patent law as much as possible. Just like the MPAA/RIAA should be made victims of bad copyright law. Then things will change for the good of the public.
The only winning move is not to play.
unfortunately, turnabout play does nothing for the customer or the nation.
It does if it convinces companies that they need to lobby against the patent system instead of for it.
Your CAPITALIZATION doesn't make sense AND what kind of moron USES "threesixty"?
Google only owns Motorola Mobility (The mobile division responsible for handsets & tablets), not all of Motorola.
About the only things that deserve patents are fundamental discoveries and drugs that are unique and cost hundreds of millions to develop and test. And even then, just provide some kind of "formula patent" that only lasts 5-6 years.
I know of very few cases when a fundamental discovery was made by a commercial company, they usually shy away from anything that takes a decade or more to develop. Usually this is funded by the goverment which is supposed to have a longer term view.
I'm starting to think that Slashdot should go the NEOGAF route when it comes to new posters: no creating topics until you have at least somewhat participated in the community. The amount of astro-turfing in Google, MS and FB stories is starting to get ridiculous.
For what it's worth: you're completely wrong. This is the only way that the patent system can be made to work and can be fixed: MAD. Once there are smoldering craters everywhere, and the entire tech landscape is a glass parking lot, maybe the powers that be (both governmental and corporate) will revisit the notion that more patent law is always better than some patent law.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
Both this action by Motorola (Google)...
The lawsuit in which Microsoft sued Motorola started long before Google began the process of acquiring Motorola Mobility and the judgment was made about a week before the acquisition. This lawsuit, in which Motorola sued Microsoft, began around the same time. Further, this was Motorola suing Microsoft, no Motorola Mobility, which Google fully acquired just a few days ago.
Google may not be perfect, but they're also not the assholes who started this shit; hell, they're not even involved int it. If anything, they're getting screwed on the Motorola Mobility deal because of this.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
The patent system is problematic, particularly as regards software patents.
OTOH, Motorola would have been foolish not to pursue actions like this that are available under the current legal regime when Microsoft was pursuing similar actions against Motorola. (e.g., the one over Motorola Android phones generating meeting requests, which resulted in an ITC import ban on them.)
Unilateral patent disarmament on Motorola's part might be good for Microsoft, but not for anyone else, and especially not for Motorola.
I'm having trouble seeing that as "serious damage".
Both this action by Motorola (Google) [...]
Try again, shill.
First, you need to actually establish the "Google is automatically evil" rhetoric before relying on it to make Motorola out to be evil-scary-fnord-fnord. Outside of you astroturfing shills, this is not a defined truth (inside of your astroturfing shills is nothing but an empty, desolate void where a soul should go, so let's focus on the outside).
Second, even if you get the first part established (just to remind you: No, you haven't), you would need to have Google buy out all of Motorola, not just the mobility part. Motorola != Google.
Third, even if you somehow got the first two parts, you'd need to establish both of these back in time from when this lawsuit started. Google does not own Motorola, remember.
I hope this helps your shilling efforts. By which I hope you simply give up shilling, which is, in fact, the only possible improvement to the act of shilling. I know this "hope" is more in the "pipe dream" category, but since you're not going to respond to any of us anyway (going on your previous accounts that you somehow seem to think we're forgetting), I don't give much concern to what you think about my hopes.
The 360 is a good console. It's not that bad. Calling people moron cause they use the 360 doesn't make sense if you ask me. It has a good gaming library, good graphics and good sound (7.1 if my memory serves me right ? idk, i don't own one). What's bad about it or why are people morons ?
Those patents sure are working well. Soon we will have nothing that we can buy in the states. We will have to travel to asia, buy it, and sneak it back here.
I think the criticism was of the use of "threesixty" as opposed to 360...
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Microsoft wants it both ways. They want to block somebody elses product.... Android..... but not their own. Fairness says both companies should be blocked. Good for the judge.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
It's about time this patent warfare resulted in some mutually assured destruction between Microsoft and Motorola.
When the bottom line gets hit, maybe somebody will have some incentive to reform the patent office.
My two favorite proposals:
1. Legally mandated cross-licensing of patents. Anyone who wants one must be given one, on equitable and even terms.
2. Patents get filed with itemized research and development costs. Any individual, company, or group can buy out the patent by paying out the office-accepted R&D costs times ten. Once bought out, the patent is public domain. If you want exclusivity, license it, don't buy it.
DUCK! That's the sound of you missing it... completely.
360 != "threesixty".
He's not saying "What kind of moron uses the 360" as in the actual console. Nothing in his post was about the console.
What he's saying is... what kind of moron uses the WORD "threesixty". I agree with him full. I've *NEVER* heard it called "threesixty".
"This follows news last week of Microsoft winning an import ban on Motorola's Android devices."
I would say this recent event was just karma biting them in the ass, and justly so. Too many patent trolls out there are whining and bitching when they get caught by the game.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2007/08/ip-firm-accuses-google-9-other-companies-of-patent-infringement
http://techcrunch.com/2010/08/07/why-we-need-to-abolish-software-patents/
http://www.feld.com/wp/archives/2011/08/time-to-really-deal-with-the-broken-software-patent-system.html
The real problem with the patent system is that ridiculous patents are validated in the first place, when most are patently (yes i went there) generic legal pitfalls, and that patents extend into domains which they shouldn't. Furthermore, patents aren't the type of protection that should even cover intellectual property. IP Law shouldn't be so convoluted that patent and copyright restrictions both enter the arena in some patchwork madness. Also, some of the expirations on the protections are just plain silly, and should instead require more consistent renewal, and offer no recourse for those who let their protections expire, after a grace period, instead of offering protection for decades at a time. Case in point is ESA enforced protection on games for NES, a console made approximately 30 years ago, because Nintendo et al decided that they wanted license games to mobile phone users, while most of those games sat around the web unnoticed by many for quite some time in easily accessible rom form.
The judge is a moron. The public has no interest in stupid ass IP lawsuits.
They should have had a BSA raid to put the shoe on the other foot.
The truth shall set you free!
On this point you are incorrect. From the ALJ's Recommendation (Footnote 1, p. 2): The complainants are Motorola Mobility, Inc. and General Instrument Corporation of Horsham, Pennsylania (collectively, "Motorola".)
My understanding is that the Xbox 360 uses Windows Media Audio 10 Professional for all system and game audio.
If the main issue is the H.264 video codec, why can't they just switch to Microsoft WMV/VC-1 or one of the many open source ones available? Sounds like a simple software system update to me if its just the video apps doing it. If H.264 is used on game discs then MS needs to payup.
Microsoft's point is also perfectly good. Banning Xbox360 will do serious damage. If you want to play any current generation AAA games, then your choice is Sony's PS3. There is Wii, but it doesn't have the games.
I play current AAA titles on my PC just fine, thank you very much. In fact they even look better than the 360's version.
And on the PC, I can download custom maps for my games. I can download custom skins and custom sounds for my games. And I can use a keyboard and mouse for FPS, instead of the absolutely retarded dual-analog sticks (seriously, how can you play when your aiming is as smooth as a robot walking on ice?)
Seriously, why would anyone play games on a console anymore? You can do so much more to your games on the PC.
:(){
It's silly overall.
The Xbox has been out for how long, and an import ban only comes up now?
I think we're seeing some wide cracks in the patent system if a product can be produced right up to EOL before an import ban can be thrown at it.
I wonder how long this system will remain viable?
Reminds me of a story concerning the game "MULE" (an excellent little multi-player economy-based game set around the building of a new colony). I liked this game a lot and often played against my brothers and friends. We'd play very competitively, each trying to maximize our own profits. Then I met a friend at college and happened to mention this game. She said, "Oh, I love that game too. What was the richest colony you made?" Until she asked, it hadn't occurred to me that you could play the game a different way: cooperatively, in order to achieve the best good for the colony as a whole.
I wonder when humanity will figure that out too.
(This is not an endorsement of "socialism" or "communism" or anything like that, or even a criticism of competition. It's just a note that we tend to focus too much on little-picture, selfish goals instead of big-picture ones. Compete to make the best thing, rather than compete to kill the competition.)
About the only things that deserve patents are fundamental discoveries and drugs that are unique and cost hundreds of millions to develop and test. And even then, just provide some kind of "formula patent" that only lasts 5-6 years.
Abolish patents entirely and replace private research with publically funded research. The hard work (discovering new drug targets) is done by the NIH anyway. All pharma does are the clinical studies which are pretty much rote. They could easly be done by the public as well. And if we take the profit motive out of the situation, maybe we won't see 100,000 annual deaths due to adverse drug reactions.
Patents exit to encourage private investors to invest in research. But if we directly fund research, we need no patents. The best part is that when the public does all the work, we'll get to keep all the profits too.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Ummm....you are ignoring the biggest inventors of all. Individuals. And individuals may corporatize their work and hire on other people (like Edison). Governments accidently invent things. Corporations buy inventions from the real inventors and turn it into a profitable venture.
But I could list plenty of great commercial company inventions, but I can leave that up for others that aren't so pro-gov as you.
If you want to play any current generation AAA games,
You could always go outside and pick up a baseball or something.
Funded by the government, then handed to a private company to exploit at our expense.
That sounds wrong. Can we hear some examples.
Maybe if the corps get hurt bad enough by their patent wars they will bribe Congressman and presidents to make changes.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
All right, how do you "fix" a system that by its very concept is bound to be a hopeless bureaucratic mess?
"I thought of it first, nyah, nyah"
"No, *I* did"
"No you didn't, I did"
"You copied it"
"No, *you* copied it"
"But mine's different from yours"
"No it isn't"
It looks like a typo, but I don't think it is. What, exactly, is "fnord"?
:(){
MS switching to an opensource codec on a closed DRM machine to get around software patents...
You are FUNNY!
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
MS seemed perfectly happy with the policy when it was Motorola getting blocked at MS's request. Sauce for the gander.
Umm...
You forgot your SarcMark. Right?
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
unfortunately, turnabout play does nothing for the customer or the nation.
It does if it convinces companies that they need to lobby against the patent system instead of for it.
Truth has been spoken.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
I think he was stuffing his shirt with straw on that one.
>>>There is Wii, but it doesn't have the games.
Funny then that Wii is the # 1 best seller. It is the Atari or NES or SNES or PS1 or PS2 of this generation. The most popular platform. AND if microsoft didn't want Xbox banned, then I guess they shouldn't have pushed to have Motorola phones banned. Ya know..... you don't throw the first punch unless you're prepared to get a bloody nose in return.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
I agree with him full. I've *NEVER* heard it called "threesixty".
How would you know? :)
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
I'm afraid I think your idea of an all-encompassing patent war yielding an eventual improvement is naive.
The only way to restore sanity is to TOSS OUT the patent system, not tinker with it. No patent system could ever be fair because the very concept of a patent is completely counter to fundamental human rights. Get rid of the system and invalidate all existing patents tomorrow. THAT would work. Perfectly.
Of course I know that will never happen, any more than "perpetrators" of victimless crimes like using drugs being released from the unprecedentedly bloated prison system, and the associated evil laws abolished.
Way to know absolutely nothing about Google, Motorola, Motorola Mobility, the purchase of Motorola Mobility by Google just a few days ago, and the lawsuit between Motorola and Microsoft that's been going on since 2010.
Yeah, Google's so evil, they even traveled 2 years back in time after acquisition to make Motorola file that lawsuit... Wait, what?
Dude, button up, your fanboi is showing.
to be fair, they bought it to defend against companies using their patents to get import bans of Android devices. Of which Microsoft is the biggest bully attacking them.
I guess they both tried to play hardball and demand licence fees, and when neither backed down, ended up in this stupid situation. Still, pass the popcorn, its amusing me and I hope it'll end up in a less stupid patent system.
'Shaw rejected that argument, finding that the public interest in enforcing intellectual property rights outweighs any potential economic impact on video game console buyers.'
This guy is seriously disconnected from the real world if he thinks that enforcing intellectual property rights is more important to the public than the availability of a popular product. As far as I can tell, the only people benefiting from the escalating levels of IP enforcement are the lawyers and cartels, while the public are getting shafted as the draconian measures erode their freedoms.
Not only was this suit filed long before Google bought Motorola Mobility, but the ALJ's initial determination of patent violation also occurred before Google bought Motorola Mobility. The only thing that has happened after Google bought Motorola Mobility is that the ALJ issued his recommendation to the ITC of what the ITC should do about regarding a remedy if the ITC upholds his determination on the violation.
All of the relevant actions of Motorola Mobility and Microsoft that contributed to the ALJ's recommendation occurred before the Google acquisition of Motorola Mobility.
So you can't really make any credible argument about Google based on this ALJ decision, even if it made sense to argue that retaliating against Microsoft's patent lawsuits against Motorola Mobility was an evil action on the part of Motorola Mobility, which it doesn't.
Microsoft's point is also perfectly good. Banning Xbox360 will do serious damage. If you want to play any current generation AAA games, then your choice is Sony's PS3. There is Wii, but it doesn't have the games.
I play current AAA titles on my PC just fine, thank you very much. In fact they even look better than the 360's version.
And on the PC, I can download custom maps for my games. I can download custom skins and custom sounds for my games. And I can use a keyboard and mouse for FPS, instead of the absolutely retarded dual-analog sticks (seriously, how can you play when your aiming is as smooth as a robot walking on ice?)
Seriously, why would anyone play games on a console anymore? You can do so much more to your games on the PC.
This....a thousand times this. My buddies with consoles rag on me for not having an XBOX 9000 or whatever the newest console is. I usually answer them by thanking them for helping me find something that I could care less about than a new iDevice being launched which used to be at the top of my list of "Things I couldn't possibly care less about." Almost everything ends up being released for the PC and in the end, I can do whatever the hell I want to do with my PC instead of doing only MS or Sony "approved" things with my console.
>>>The hard work (discovering new drug targets) is done by the NIH anyway.
False.
And profit motive is what makes a doctor or hospital desire to do a better job (and draw customers away from the competition). If the profit motive did not exist and they knew they would get paid anyway, even if they did a shitty job, then they'd be like government-employed teachers. Let me cue-up the video where a teacher was criticizing Mitt Romney as a bully, but then threatened to cane a student who called Obama a bully too. The student said, "They cannot take away your right to have your opinion." The teacher states, "OK, do I have to get my cane? As a social studies teacher, I cannot allow you to slander any President." The teacher cannot be fired, so she keeps getting paid even as she does a lousy job. http://www.infowars.com/teacher-yells-at-student-criminal-offense-to-criticize-obama/
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
unfortunately, turnabout play does nothing for the customer or the nation.
The patent law is only half the problem. The other half is the business practices that these companies
choose to take.
Given the inertia in changing the patent system, (good luck seeing that in your life time), the import bans are (arguably) the way to go.
Only by forcing these things into the nuclear condition can you ever get big companies to realize that cheap and perfunctory
cross-licensing is the only way to assure there are no costly misadventures down the line.
Once it become the norm to cross-license (or very cheaply license), and the companies realize its more
trouble and less revenue than it is worth to go after someone for these tiny little improvements and
combinations of existing technology, they will perhaps stop beating each other up with lawyers.
They could then do it all on line, via email, and maybe they would simply resort to publishing these inconsequential
compilations of technology, so that nobody else could patent them and let the chips fall where they may.
Its fitting that Microsoft got caught in this trap. Now if we can catch Apple's next phone and block it
at the ports maybe some progress can be made in this direction.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
you demand that all software patents come complete with working prototype source code.
I am told that there are a thousand mousetrap patents in the patent office, each one with blueprint describing how to build one. Now, if we use the same approach for software patents, you should be able to create the same concept in a different way - eg, trapping mice, or maybe sliding something to unlock a screen.
As it is, software patents simply patent the concept, and they are usually as vague as possible. It is also easy to submit a thousand patents, making working code be supplied with it would make the number of submissions reduce, and would let us have open source code after the patent expires, and would allow people to implement the same thing as long as it didn't use the same codebase (or a significant amount of the code already patented).
It would possibly be the best compromise between no software patents and patenting some algorithms that are real inventions such a GSM radio or video codecs.
"Banning Xbox360 will do serious damage. If you want to play any current generation AAA games, then your choice is Sony's PS3."
You could go outside and take a nice walk in the park. Being unable to play a specific type of video game doesn't really count as "serious damage."
1. Because of the games that are only available consoles.
2. Because the cost of buying a new console every 6-8 years is less than the cost of keeping a computer current enough to play the new games when they come out.
3. Because some people like simplicity, and when you buy a PS3 game, you know it will play on your PS3 without having to look up a single hardware requirement or driver compatibility crash bug report.
For me it's primarily number 1, although number 3 is nice at times. I play both PC and console games, but honestly, there's just far more console exclusives I want to play than PC exclusives, so I spend more time on my console. As a note, both user mods and keyboard/mouse play are supported for at least some of the consoles, even if developers don't always take advantage of it and their might be some extra red tape around the mods.
Sounds like a line from the Obama campaign. Hail Der Fuhrer!
this wouldn't be a problem if the jobs didn't go overseas and the saving from the cut salaries go into vacation home #4 or even worse, into a tax attorney who gets the guy a 10% tax rate
Because real nerds would either call it 2pi or 400 (grad)
Yeah, it gets even better.
Consider the game Left 4 Dead 2 (not "current", but it is a AAA title).
There have been two DLCs released so far, they're working on their third one. All PC users got all DLC for free. All XBox users had to pay for the DLC.
PC players have had access to the third DLC's maps for almost a year now. XBox requires a certification process, though, so XBox doesn't have it yet.
PC players get regular updates which (sometimes) include bug fixes and stuff. XBox players must wait until a DLC to get bug fixes.
PC players can set up their own dedicated server and mod it. XBox players rely on Valve's servers.
PC players can download custom maps, custom skins, and custom sounds. XBox players can't change anything.
PC players can access the console to send different commands, they can change their binds, they can use scripts. XBox can't do any of that.
Borderlands is another title with pretty much the same dynamic, except PC players had to buy their Borderlands DLC. Everything else applies though; custom maps, custom content, etc. are only available for PC.
Portal 2 has the Steam Workshop. So does Skyrim.
:(){
I've never heard it called the "XBox three hundred sixty". I have heard it called "XBox 3-60" or "XBox three-sixty"
When did playing on a game console become a need?
Just this morning I read a seemingly unrelated article in which the author, a former Motorola Mobility employee, theorized that a little talked-about possibility for Google wanting to buy MMI centers around set-top boxes.
The Google/Motorola Deal is Done. What Now?
http://www.informationweek.com/byte/news/personal-tech/smart-phones/240000845
According to the article linked above, Motorola moved their "home" division, which includes set-top boxes which Motorola manufacturers, over to Motorola Mobility in an attempt to "sweeten the deal" for Google to buy it. If that assertion is correct then one can conclude that Google is the real entity that just got the ITC to impose a ban on the xBox.
While this may look like another garden-variety patent battle I'll bet it has more to do with the upcoming TV battlefield that, rumor has it, already includes Apple and their yet-to-be-officially-announced AppleTV. The folks at Google appear to be well into their plans to compete with Apple (and Microsoft, which already has a set-top box in xBox).
Silicon Valley is betting huge on TV content streaming and gaming.
That's SarcMark ® and if you try that again, well, get ready for your lawsuit, buddy!
No, they get labeled as a shill when the account is made fresh just for the story. Their position on issues is secondary.
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
take your hammer and sickle back to china you dirty zipperhead
I think we're seeing some wide cracks in the patent system if a product can be produced right up to EOL before an import ban can be thrown at it.
Looking at it rationally, how could it possibly work any other way?
Given that there are patents, gazillions of them, how can you possibly read thru each and every on to find out if your new product might have run afoul of some clause in some obscure patent, especially when the language of those patents is purposely written to be vague and all inclusive? You would have to spend two years of patent lawyer time researching what it took you two months to breadboard up in the lab.
These things are always going to be discovered after the fact.
While developing your new gizmo, you only look at the obvious competitors. (Some avoid looking at all, due to the risk of idea pollution).
Microsoft does not see Motorola as a competitor in game consoles, so they ignore them. Same for John Deere tractors. No game consoles. Ignore them.
But then they make the mistake of trying to block Motorola phones, and Moto starts digging around in its bag of patents for a club to hit Microsoft with.
Would Moto spend that time and money without the initial provocation? I'm guessing not.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
>>> All PC users got all DLC for free. All XBox users had to pay for the DLC.
If you want to make the argument "saving money" than the Xbox or any other console wins. A console costs about $200 plus tax. A gaming PC costs over 10 times that amount... plus frequent hardware updates (else the latest games won't work). Overall the gaming PC is a major eater of money, while a console is pretty cheap.
I bought PS3 for $200 (sale price) plus $18 for each game (greatest hits price) and have about 50 of them. So... $1100. Less than what I would have spent on a gaming computer plus games plus new video cards. Plus the frustation of games that simply refuse to install.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
>>>False.
Oh well, OK. I guess I was wrong then. Thanks for setting me straight. It's not like I've worked in biology for a decade or anything. It's not like I've taken medical pharmacology classes where they explained exactly who is responsible for what part of the drug discovery process. Nah, your simple assertion without evidence is all I need to change my mind.
Oh hell, I have, and I know what I'm talking about. And it's easily verifiable if you go to the library and read a book or two about the pharmaceutical industry. The fact is the pharmaceutical industry contributes very little to the process, and pockets the vast majority of the profits. Deny this if you like, it only illustrates your ignorance.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Do you really think it's a good ban to prevent all motorola android devices from being imported because they can be used to organize a meeting ? An eye for an eye, bitches.
Exactly.
Would Motorola spend all this time tearing down an XBox and comparing every tiny detail against each of their mountain of patents without provocation? Where is the business case for that? Pay the Motorola lawyers to prevent Microsoft from making a profit? How does that help Moto? Does it protect their game console business?
Moto only sued because they were sued for offering a portable way of performing a perfectly normal business activity via electronic communications.
Only when companies learn that they have more to lose than they have to gain will this silliness stop.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Micro$oft just needs to pay up as the judge ruled to get their consoles out of customs or wait for the appeal and not have them in the market. If they don't want to pay in the future, simply remove the offending IP from any new consoles. It may not be profitable for Micro$oft's game console business, but it is what it is.
My Guess is that Micro$soft will eventually pay up, but right now they are hoping to reduce the supply of units in the pipeline by slowing production. The game console business is not very profitable, so this may just hasten the end, but it will surely be cheaper to pay up and sell already built hardware than to just dump it into the trash.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Jesus, I hope you are trolling. ALL fundamental discoveries? I could swallow a "most", but only you are really only asking for one single counter example to be proven wrong??
Enforcing intellectual property rights means charging us more for the same thing, that is against our interests. It is in the interests of entrenched players, they benefit from IP rights but the public just gets hosed by them. If we did away with the patent system competition would keep technology advancing. There is always a better way to do something and always someone willing to do it. Open source software proves this point. The patent system needs to be abolished and patent lawyers rendered into Soylent Green.
Because someone is shitty person doesn't mean they are a shitty teacher.
I had a creationist nutjob for a science teacher back in high school - we did the bare minimum for the evolution part of the curriculum, the read the text book while I twiddle my thumbs approach. However, he taught me mechanics and electromagnetism very well.
And anyway are you sure she's doing a shitty job? Maybe that's exactly what her employer wants her to do?
"- 1 This moderator disagrees."
Gee thanks. But I'm not changing my opinion just because you punish me with a -1 whipping. Sorry mod.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Seriously, why would anyone play games on a console anymore? You can do so much more to your games on the PC.
That wasn't directed at me, but here are my reasons:
1) I don't want to have to dual boot so that I can play AAA games. It saves me a Windows license, the hard drive space, the annoyance of multi-booting, etc.
2) Being able to just sit down on the couch with a beer, pop in a game, and play it lounging back without having a keyboard/mouse spread is relaxing. I do love playing PC games as well, but sometimes I just want to be sprawled. If I played competitively, I'd probably only play on PC.
3) I'm growing older and don't have the time or energy to upgrade my hardware in bits. I'd rather buy a new console for a few hundred dollars every 5-7 years instead of component upgrades every 0.5-1 years.
It also helps that my gaming isn't mostly twitch-shooters. If it was, that would also change how I probably played games.
It's like MAD where both sides just say "eh, fuck it".
yes lets just hand Sony a monopoly...
I think the point mozumder was trying to make is that a lot of basic research is funded by government grants. Corporations are very happy to throw money at a discovery that seems likely to produce more money immediately, but are generally loath to spend money on discoveries that are not directly something they can sell.
An example Carl Sagan brought up is Maxwell's equations on electromagnetic fields. Extremely important to radar, television, cell phones, and a million other major technologies today. His equations are fundamental to trillions and trillions of dollars in profits today. But the equations themselves are just knowledge and wouldn't turn a profit directly. In today's climate, Maxwell would be funded by grants from the government, corporations would be unlikely to fund him.
Anyone who's ever taken an economics coarse has figured that out. They however have also probably figured out that the next epiphany is that if everyone is working for the common good except one selfish bastard who is out for himself, the selfish bastard wins at the expense of everyone else.
The day we solve that problem is the day we can declared victory on basically all of society's problems excepting a few edge cases like disease and the irreversibly of entropy.
Everybody talks about fixing the patent law like its something you get get passed overnight.
I can't imagine a single thing congress could pass that would solve the problem in any reasonable time frame.
Shorten new patent terms? Results is more patent filings. (Take old patent, tweak it yearly, file new patent). Does nothing for those already issued.
Ex post facto shorten existing patent terms? Huge "taking" fight.
Kill off entire types of patents? Kill off Business Process patents, and the cockroaches wrap it in hardware or software and call it something else.
Expand the trivial and obvious test? That hasn't been successful for two hundred years, what could change it now?
I doubt Congress could ever accomplish anything in this regard with every lobbyist in the country pouring money into pockets.
But if you have any ideas, I'd love to hear them.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Gee thanks. But I'm not changing my opinion just because you punish me with a -1 whipping. Sorry mod.
Considering how you still don't get it (or are intentionally feigning ignorance), I don't expect you ever will change, Mr Troll64.
Well, the late 90's/early 2000's was when PCs were going through some major changes: 95 started the transition out of the old DOS prompt, gaming in general was transitioning to 3D, game engines and graphic cards starting off as "serious business", so there were lots of bugs and issues to work out.
PC gaming back then was being on the cutting edge, so yea you needed to upgrade every couple of years to keep up. Before, it was a 1337 thing to be able to play FPSes online against foul mouthed 12 year olds! /tongueincheek
Nowadays things are more developed and stable. The difference between PC and console gaming is getting smaller... so now you can play yet-another-FPS online against foul mouthed 12 year olds on any system! /tongueincheek
It's ridiculous.
Yes it certainly is, but Microsoft shot first.
Banning Xbox360 will do serious damage
Car accidents will increase? Patients will go untreated? Soldiers won't get supplies?
Oh... bored 20 and 30-somethings won't get to play supersoldier and pretend to kill aliens, gods, and each other? Serious damage indeed!
If you want to play any current generation AAA games, then your choice is Sony's PS3
Or they could always buy a PC...It could even run Microsoft Windows, and be controlled with an Xbox game controller.
(This is not an endorsement of "socialism" or "communism" or anything like that, or even a criticism of competition. [...])
It's quite telling that you need to add this to your comment, as if promoting cooperation over competition was somehow un-American (I'm assuming you're from the US).
As the saying goes, "Those who live by the sword die by the sword".
No, all fundamental discoveries are made by government. Commercial entities have never invented anything.
That is because profit is incompatible with social benefit.
We need to encourage more funding from government through taxation of corporation. Let's give government more control over corporations.
There are intermediate entities like old AT&T labs where invented transistor was invented. Note that because AT&T was a monopoly the patent was licensed for only a nominal fee. If it was a pure commercial company expect the computer revolution delayed by a decade.
Keep in mind that Universities, one of the biggest centers of innovation (often government funded), tend to have massive patent portfolios. They license them out to companies and that in turn funds more fundamental research. So if we killed the system completely we would also have to restructure how basic research is done... which would probably be a good, thing.. just pointing out that corporations are not the only ones utilizing this system.
Is that like playing Risk where no one attacks each other? Of course it yields many many more armies and everyone lives in harmony. But it is completely uninteresting and lacks creativity. May as well live without possessions like a Franciscan.
Maybe when enough shit is banned and enough people are forced to pay insane sums of money on captain obvious's bullshit enough of us will have had enough that something meaningful actually gets done about insane, unfair and illogical legal regimes...enough to overcome lobbies who prefer stagnation, lockin and lack of competition.
Nintendo and PS3 have got to be infringing on something...come on trolls do your worst. Someone has got to have patented the act of talking into a portable sheet of glass and plastic all phone imports and exports must be banned. Everyone using any electronic device is guilty of infringing on something.
Oblig The Oatmeal comic
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla
21st Century Renaissance Man
I am guessing you have never worked in R&D. It is not quite as extreme as Hatta indicates, but a great deal of the heavy lifting in drug research is indeed done by government funded entities, with the liability and market centric tasks done by the drug companies.
Generally people don't go into research because of a 'profit motive'. Research jobs do not pay all that well, esp the ones on the 'heavy lifting' side of thing, so they tend to be staffed by people who are motived through doing good research and building reputation.
Not sure what a video about some jerk has to do with anything.
1. Nintendo
2. Someone may argue the case of PCs, tablets, smartphones, etc. knocks Sony from being a monopoly on it as well (although that is clearly arguable).
Edison wasn't an inventor. He built upon the work of 22 other people and still couldn't perfect the lightbulb nor DC energy without the help of Nikola Tesla. Edison was a greedy ass CEO. Huge difference.
(MAD= Mutually Assured Destruction)
was that noone was actually supposed to pull the trigger!!!
DOH!
If I recall correctly, tech companies, including Microsoft, DID lobby for patent reform. Unfortunately the reforms they asked for were only given to the banking industry.
Sadly there is a bit of game theory here.. every company wants everyone else to play nice and back down, but will get the best return if they don't, so you end up with these arms races since no one wants to 'loose'.
Your end comment is exactly what made Apple so successful. No one at Apple (not even Jobs) ever really expected Apple to crush their competitors and become "top dog". Jobs wanted to create the best products they could and attract the few customers who appreciated that quality and were willing to pay a little bit more to get it. That was the plan anyhow. Of course now that they are the corporate behemoth that they have become, they are playing the same game as everyone else, and that I fear will lead to their eventual doom.
...fuck you Motorola. I'm never buying another piece of shit product of yours. And I will make sure nobody I know does. Fucking losers.
M.U.L.E. is a little different than RISK, it's more like a farming game.
Players can specialize, and decide to produce food, or only electricity, or other goods, then trade them on the market. There are geographic features that improve certain types of actions in each territory, and assignment is semi-roulette, so if you specialize in things your territory is good for you depend on others to survive (by getting things you need during the trading phases), but can be a lot more productive. At the end the game reports both individual and combined scores. At my house we got "The Colony was a Success" a couple times.
Do you really think it's a good ban to prevent all motorola android devices from being imported because they can be used to organize a meeting
Well, from an economic impact point of view, I bet that having fewer meetings organized would result in a vast improvement in productivity, and so society as a whole benefits, so yeah - sounds like a plan. I do hope that Motorola also has a (different) patent on meetings, though, so that it can prevent importation of WP7 phones - then we're good.
Next you'll tell me that the solution to the world's problems is communism...
I could start listing stuff invented by individuals. I could do the same for "commercial entities".
I'll just name one each: Edison's lightbulb and transistors.
The subsequent epiphany is that an entire society working together for the common good will pretty easily curb stomp the one selfish bastard who tries to run it for their own personal gain.
Edison's lightbulb is a really bad example. Edison took something which was already working in a lab (wire emitting light when you send electricity through it) and made it actually useful. Before Edison it was a scientific curiousity.
That is not fundamental research, it is directed product development.
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
Er who does drug research?
The idea that corporations shy away from long term research is simply absurd, they fund long term/blue sky research all the time.
The British NHS has been a state-funded venture from the start (although there is currently legislation in place to change this) so the doctors do not gain/lose anything through profit motive, their general motivation to do their job is the Hypocratic oath and general ethical outlook. Suggesting all doctors are driven by profit seems to be a bit insulting to the profession. Hell, even lawyers do pro bono work, and they're the ones I'd classify as "profit driven" if anyone.
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
If you're trying to make a case against socialized medicine, keep in mind that most countries do provide financial incentives to do better. Eg they get a bonus for convincing someone to stop smoking. In the US, the medical industry would seem to benefit (make money) from smokers.
"This isn't an argument!"
"Yes it is."
"No it isn't."
Free Martian Whores!
Edison's lightbulb is a really bad example. Edison took something which was already working in a lab (wire emitting light when you send electricity through it) and made it actually useful. Before Edison it was a scientific curiousity.
That is not fundamental research, it is directed product development.
Since we are on the topic, I once chanced on an issue of "Review of Scientific Instruments" from around 1900s. I was amazed by lots of articles on many ingenious devices based on transformers, vacuum bulbs and many unlike anything I heard before. Nowadays we look back and think "Lightbulb, Fleming valve, Multiphase motor" but there was a lot of research..
It's "Da Tree Zix Oh" around these parts, yo.
I actually work for a hospital system and we back huge campaigns against smoking (which is not allowed on any of our campuses) as well as texting and driving. Arguably both are "good for business".
To be fair, we're also not-for-profit, but are one of the larger not-for-profits in the region (by region, I mean 1/4 of the US).
Just another ignorant American.
Keep in mind that Universities, one of the biggest centers of innovation (often government funded), tend to have massive patent portfolios. They license them out to companies and that in turn funds more fundamental research^W^W^W bigger stadium. So if we killed the system completely we would also have to restructure how basic research is done... which would probably be a good, thing.. just pointing out that corporations are not the only ones utilizing this system.
FTFY. Sorry..
"focus too much on little-picture, selfish goals instead of big-picture ones"
And who gets to define the "big picture" - Hitler had a big picture, so did Stalin and the list goes on and on.... These things never work and looks like we never learn from it.... Nothing beats a society where each individual can decide for themselves what is important and what is not...
Yeah, I think this was just a "oh, you want to block our phones? We'll block your console then, Nyah."
The penguin made me do it.
Capitalism is based on competition.
But if EVERYTHING is patented, trademarked, copyrighted, so that it's impossible to even make any kind of product without infringing on something, then Capitalism is OVER. Because everything will be held eventually by one company, and that company will have a monopoly on EVERYTHING, and therefore will also control the government. End Game == Fascism.
For the good of Democracy in a Capitalist society, IP "laws" must end.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
I'm also a PC gamer, but all three of those are good reasons to get a console instead. PC gaming has become far more user friendly, but I still have weird driver problems and odd crashes that aren't related to the game itself. The cost factor doesn't really apply anymore. Most of the games that come out will play fine on older hardware, at lower settings, and my $650 Acer Laptop didn't cost much more than the PS3 on launch. Plus, it's a laptop, and far more useful than the PS3. I think number 3 is the motherfucker. A child can shop for PS3 games, but you kinda have to know a little bit about your system to be a regular PC gamer. Hopefully services like OnLive will change this.
The penguin made me do it.
Every time PC vs consoles topic comes up, this non-argument is trotted out and it doesn't become any more true from repetition.
Honestly, I don't remember what was PC prices like 6 years ago when XBox 360 and PS 3 came out (and PS3's price was $599 back then), but I bought my current PC 3 years ago, it cost me $350 and it runs "latest games" (last was Skyrim) just fine on maximal/near maximal settings and 1440x900 resolution.
As "latest games" specs are aimed at those 6 year old consoles, you don't need $2000 PC to play latest games unless you want to show off and play them on huge monitor in 2560x1600 resolution with all graphics settings maxed out (which consoles just can't do, look for Crysis PC vs Crysis XBox comparison, for example). If you're playing in console resolutions and console quality, you can buy a new PC enough for that for $300-400, and for $200 on sale you can get something more powerful than PS3 already.
There is nothing more cooperatively competitive than open source, and I don't think anyone would accuse Red Hat of being communist. Some of us are just waiting for the rest of the world to catch up.
The penguin made me do it.
All you need for PC gaming is a $50 video card. The rest of the machine doesn't cost extra because you'd have machine for browsing web and for work anyway.
You only think it would be like that because you've been brainwashed by your corporations. Those of us who live in countries where the doctors and hospitals are government owned and operated know for a fact that your statement is patently absurd. Our doctors and hospitals do strive to do their best, despite the sole financial motive being "not making a loss".
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
I've even heard people in the industry say "biology is pointless" because modifying existing drugs is so much cheaper than target discovery.
.: Semper Absurda
Only a moron would spell out "threesixty" is what I got from it. Perfectly fine to drop the word XBox. People understand what your saying. Spelling out numbers that way is dumb. Still dumb if you wrote "three hundred and sixty."
I don't hear comments on slashdot. I read them. "threesixty" is dumb. Write "360", "XBox", or "XBox 360".
Risk is really bad example. And if you're comparing Risk to life you need to A) go outside and smell the flowers and see how many billions of different things there are out there and B) not have a one track mind. MULE is a lot more complex than Risk. So is life. You can pick up risk when your 6 years old.
Follow up: your also comparing playing Unreal Tournament and doing nothing - to playing Civilization 4 and trying to win through diplomacy or the space race.
It is flawed to think that Einstein is any more valuable then the kid that volunteers to mow his lawn on sunday. You would have neither the food or social structure to support an Einstien, and the kid would always live in poverty. The problem is, capitalism and liaze faire has been corrupted to be a "Only big corporations" only zone. Therefore cutting out any individual upward mobility or penetration into the markets, and also eliminating many small free markets and creating one big controlled one.
There is also a structure of fear, and the need to control that which is not of your class, race, or religion. That needs to be surmounted before we can respect, recognize, and share with each-other.
Its a very Star Trekkian thing... the guy who dies in the jefferies tube who saves the ship is no more or less important then the captain giving the orders on a bridge. Society as a whole has become a polarized, us vs them. The guys on the bridge are so afraid of dieing from lack, they have cut off all the life support and oxygen to that level, therefore loosing the ship. Though they don't see it that way....
I'm sure almost everyone working in the public sector agrees that taking more of my money and giving it to the public sector is the right answer, not matter what the question is. You know what? Fuck them all, each and every one.
The public sector almost never creates products. Open ended research is nice, but is not sufficient to deliver any actual increase in quality of life. Plus, there's never been a nation or culture where rapid technological advancement came from the government. The industrial revolution, and all the progress in its waqke, has come from the profit motive. Evil evil profits, making life better for you and I.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
This should be enforced. And Microsoft has to tell people WHY it's being enforced... Maybe then some politician's kids will complain to their parents and something will be done.
Let's not forget that the patent system doesn't just cover electrical & programming tech.
It also covers chemical, pharma, materials, manufacturing, physical machines, etc.
It's a mess having one patent system to cover everything under the sun.
The problem is that there would be an even bigger mess if there were different rules and multiple categories.
Patents do have a useful purpose, even today. It does provide incentive to do long-term R&D.
The problems I see:
1.) Corporate Arrogance:
- Patent licenses are often far more expensive than they are worth.
- Companies decide it's cheaper to litigate than to license - and as often as not, they are right.
- "A good is worth exactly what its buyer is willing to pay" - when a federal patent lawsuit is the cheaper option for your customers, your good is overpriced.
2.) Parts of the law are written in a way that encourage lawsuits:
- There's no incentive to find out what other companies have patented; in fact, you are penalized for it. I understand the reasons why it's written that way, though.
3.) The patentability bar is too low.
Patents are generally seen as a good thing - they provide incentive for long-term R&D. It's not as apparent in the computer industry, but it is in others.
The problem is writing an effective law is not easy - it's harder than writing code that's completely free of bugs and security holes. The difference is there's tremendous pressure to just leave the bugs in place. "it worked in the past! It can't be wrong!" (i.e. the fallacy that nothing ever changes, and laws can't/shouldn't be changed.)
-- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
PC gaming has changed a bit from the crap 15 years ago that you're still hung up on. Stuff on Steam "just works" to the extent it ever did in any environment. I've been burned before on classic games that dont work on Windows 7, but there's usually a warning about that somewhere on the game sales page (and those games cost less than $5, so I don't much care). Recent titles are just download-and-run. MMO clients "just work" too - never had a problem with any of them.
A gaming PC that can run recent games at console resolutions wil ocust less than $1000, and will last as long as the console generation (as most PC games also run on the current console these days, you don't need to upgrade your PC unless you want new graphics bling).
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
And profit motive is what makes a doctor or hospital desire to do a better job (and draw customers away from the competition). If the profit motive did not exist and they knew they would get paid anyway, even if they did a shitty job, then they'd be like government-employed teachers.
Actually heir motive is not doing a better job, heir motive is making sure your HMO gets billed as much or as little as possible(depending on the allegiance of said hospital to your HMO). If you want an example of an actual profit motive, then look at parts of medicine that is not covered by health insurance - plastic surgery is probably the only one. Otherwise, doctors in hospitals are already those bureaucracy employed people, just like teachers.
You do realize when you censor my post and make it invisible with a -1 Mod, I'll just repost it right? I am entitled to hold an opinion even if you disagree with it
ANSWER: Because trying to make a game work on a PC is an exercise in frustration. I quit PC gaming in the late 90s when I couldn't make several games install without getting errors (or else they installed but kept crashing). It wasn't like the old days of the Atari or Commodore or Amiga gaming when the game *just worked* straight out of the box.
Wintel PC gaming sucks. It is an exercise in banging your head against the desk out of frustration that the damn game won't work. I prefer the plug-and-play ease of my old PCs (Atari, Commodore, etc) and modern day consoles. So do most customers which is why console games sell millions of copies, while PC games barely sell a few thousand.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
ANYWAY you could have cited some examples where only government provides us with new drugs..... but you didn't. So you did not prove your claim.
And yet you expect us to just accept your word on a variety of issues without citations...
Funny how everyone making the point you are making are either brand-new users or ACs.
End Game == Fascism.
The End-game of capitalism is Fascism anyway. By reducing political involvement to voting as a form of consumer confidence, people become used to the idea that Government is something that is provided for you, rather than something you have to actively participate in and contribute to. Whether the existing public sector evolves to adapt, or whether it gets surpassed by the private sector providing the infrastructure requirements, in the end, taxation becomes payment for services, the public sector adopts corporate hierarchy structures that retain people with "success-first" mentalities, and ideology becomes driven by factors that the markets take to be essential values.
That's not an argument against dropping IP laws. But what's the driving reason? If you're worried that it's a block to Free Capitalism, then you're right to be worried, but wrong to think IP has anything to do with it.
Myu:
But I'm not changing my opinion just because you punish me with a -1 whipping. Sorry mod.
You may not change your opinion, but if you get enough "-1 whippings" you will change your username, isn't that right?
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
The technical term is "what goes around, comes around".
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
s/bribe/instruct/
Er who does drug research?
May I volunteer?
In general, to foster cooperation, you need some ideals that the great majority agree upon. Your examples are quite the opposite.
At the same time, though, the majority of people can be real dumb asses. So perhaps things ought to be decided by a majority of people who have enough education to know what they're talking about. Of course, everyone should be able to get educated.
But as far as what "needs" to be decided - that's where we need to be careful. I'm all for preserving freedoms and such, but as life plainly shows, there are lots of messy issues. Regarding the issue at hand: How should inventors be compensated? Or artists, writers, and other creative folks? How could we encourage people to make *more* use of previous work, rather than less?
The original systems that were put in place for these things (patents, copyrights, etc) are being co-opted more and more as simply tools for corporations to benefit financially from the public while doing less and less work. They're addicted to their "revenue streams", and they keep going back to the government to make them bigger and last longer. The government set these things up as a balancing act between the creators and the common good, but the balance has been lost (taken).
I'm doing too much pondering on an empty stomach...
This is especially interesting in light of the Google acquisition. It sure looks like an MS move to cockblock Google.
PC games are orders of magnitude cheaper and you only need one computer with a good video card. The only thing consoles add is practicality, a consistent interface and some exclusives. A console will be limited by it's current video card. You can upgrade the one on your PC very very easily and very cheaply.
Now, I only play occasionally on my iPhone. I no longer feel any need to sit where my console dictates it to me, and $7 for the most expensive game (like Infinity Blade II) is much better than $70. The fact that some are shorter than console versions is also a plus for me.
unfinished: (adj.)
Add in another $100 or so for a Windows license, at least in my case. And then, if you're going to connect it to the internet, you're probably going to need a bunch of security software as well. (Certainly I would, as I have no idea how to secure Windows. I haven't used an MS product since '97.)
They're going for a block on Windows too in Germany. I wonder if they could get the ITC to stand for that one. Now THAT would be interesting.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Now that they're part of Google they can leverage some awesome search engine technology, some offshore human resources and huge Google money to reverse engineer every Microsoft, Apple and Oracle product to inspect against 24,000 patents. And then spin out infringement lawsuit bundles to little IP startups for enforcement. Turn it into a profit center. That should be fun.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Whoosh.
Motorola Mobility is the part of Motorola that got the 17,000 patents and 6,500 pending patent applications.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
The easy way to secure a Windows box it to turn it off. For extra safety, immerse it in salt water as well. For the maximum in security, immerse it in the salt water first and then turn it off.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
I'm wondering what this will do to the cases in (California?) and Germany. I had heard the US court had put a hold on enforcement of a similar ban on XBox in Germany. With a US Court having the same findings I wonder if the German ban will now be allowed to proceed.
Great week for Google anyway.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
There's a lot of cooperation in a free market society, or else you wouldn't even have half the things you have right now, nor would you be here replying to a message. Just look at how many companies are involved to build an airplane, car or machines, quite a lot of different companies working cooperatively for the better good and of course more profit. This is just plain dirty fighting between one technology company vs. the other.
I think you illustrate perfectly fine that basic logic is challenging enough for you, how about getting on with the wars after you grasp it?
p.s.>
because risk, by nature of its ruleset, only allows for creativity / interesting situations when you wage war. life on the other hand.
If you restrict the market algorithm in the way you suggest, you do not get a better result. Humans aren't wired to predict the actions of other humans who act with certain arbitrary, subjective morals. They are wired to assume a kind of pseudorationality. This works much better for distribution of labour.
I don't see how that could work. Usually patents are submitted on the basis of source code which you've already written, but regardless: it's way easier for a programmer to write software than to write a legal document. I don't think that would add a significant hurdle for patent submissions.
What role would the example code have? If the patent scope is limited to the function of that code, that's basically reducing the patent to copyright. Someone could extract the general algorithm and write their own version. If the patent claims list still determines the scope of the patent - and the code is just one possible implementation - then adding that code makes no difference, you'd be in the same position as today.
(This is not an endorsement of "socialism" or "communism" or anything like that, or even a criticism of competition. It's just a note that we tend to focus too much on little-picture, selfish goals instead of big-picture ones. Compete to make the best thing, rather than compete to kill the competition.)
Well, you may not want to endorse socialism, but I sure as hell will.
Marxism and Socialism and Communism should not be treated as dirty words. They are valid, well thought out and highly viable ways to run a country and an economy.
There is a hell of a lot or knee-jerk reactions whenever either of those three words are used, which tends to derail any discussion into an irrational mess of name-calling and idiocy.
Everyone should read Das Kapital (the Penguin classics edition is what I have, it's very nice). Karl Marx was a visionary and a hero to workers everywhere. It is such a shame that his philosophies have been appropriated by power-hungry tyrants and twisted into something Marx never intended.
Eat the rich.
Hello there AC, this is the internet and you must be very new here. I'm happy to see that you've finally gotten a computer and an internet connection, the big question is how you have found /. and not the oatmeal.
Or they could always buy a PC...It could even run Microsoft Windows, and be controlled with an Xbox game controller.
Much noise has been made about Xbox 360 and PS3 games' multiplayer modes going online-only as opposed to split- or otherwise shared-screen. But PC games are even less likely than Xbox 360 games to support even two players on one machine.
Every time PC vs consoles topic comes up, this non-argument is trotted out and it doesn't become any more true from repetition.
You say your gaming PC cost you $350. How much did gaming PCs for other members of the same household cost, and with the demise of spawn installation, how much did extra copies of those games cost? Though one can plug two to four gamepads into a PC, almost no mainstream games take advantage of it.
PC games are orders of magnitude cheaper
Really? One order of magnitude is a factor of ten; two are a factor of 100. Perhaps if you include Flash or JavaScript games or the old freeware on LiberatedGames, the average PC game is less than 1/100 the price of the average console game.
and you only need one computer
What PC games do you recommend that support multiple gamepads on one computer?
A console will be limited by it's current video card. You can upgrade the one on your PC very very easily and very cheaply.
How do I upgrade the video card in the majority of laptops? Otherwise, someone for whom "your PC" means a laptop must first buy a desktop PC.
Now, I only play occasionally on my iPhone.
An unlocked iPhone costs more than $600, which will buy two Xbox 360 consoles with hard drives.
The rest of the machine doesn't cost extra because you'd have machine for browsing web and for work anyway.
I'm using my Dell laptop for browsing web. Where do I plug in the $50 video card? Or should I be buying a new laptop anyway because it's due for a 2-year battery replacement?
What's so wrong with a username that references the CPU in the Apple II, Commodore 64, Atari 800, and other classic home computers where games "just worked"?
Being able to just sit down on the couch with a beer, pop in a game, and play it lounging back without having a keyboard/mouse spread is relaxing. I do love playing PC games as well, but sometimes I just want to be sprawled.
PROTIP: Several PC games support gamepads as well, and for games that aren't in genres known for precise mouse twitching, you can use a USB gamepad to emulate a keyboard. All HDTVs from the past five years have an HDMI input that works with the DVI-D or HDMI output on your PCs, and most also have a VGA input.
well, I was thinking of something more concrete than a snippet of pseudocode. Amazon wouldn't get it's 1-click patent passed if they showed how obvious it really was, nor would Apple get its slide-to-unlock patented for everything. They could get their implementation, but that shouldn't stop anyone else coming up with a different way of sliding a graphic - now you may argue that the sliding graphic is the patent and that's what occurs today, but I'd say that implementation is what gets patented so you could come up with something else that uses a slider and bypasses most of the patent problems.
I'm not saying its a perfect solution, but while business requires patents, we're not going to get round the problem of vague and broad patents, especially those that are stupid but because they have "on a mobile device", or "on the internet" tagged on the end they get patented. (the reason is that 'on a mobile device' means 'requires complex and patentable work to implement' and thus becomes eligible for patenting - I understand the supreme court are to look at the ways these vague ideas get tied to implementations and might stop them happening - in which case my idea of working software isn't too far off a solution)
Well I like the bit about keeping it going to "serve the public interest". If these were heart/lung machines, they may have a point.
But nothing is less necessary than entertainment luxuries.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
YHBT.
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
Oh I know cpu6502 is a troll.
>>>pharmacology classes where they explained exactly who is responsible for what part of the drug discovery process
Yeah I'm sure the liberal professors really told you the truth (not). Just as they claim 100% socialism is the answer to all our problems. Professors have opinions, but if those opinions are not backed by anything, then they are worthless. You could have cited some examples where only government provides us with new drugs..... but you didn't. So you did not prove your claim.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
>>>PC games are orders of magnitude cheaper and you only need one computer with a good video card
My $250 Win7 PC doesn't run the latest games. It doesn't even play HD video at proper speed (480p is the best it can do). On the other hand my PS3 does play the latest games. I'll continue using the PS3 (and Nintendo wii) for my entertainment.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
The 360 is a good console. It's not that bad. Calling people moron cause they use the 360 doesn't make sense if you ask me. It has a good gaming library, good graphics and good sound (7.1 if my memory serves me right ? idk, i don't own one). What's bad about it or why are people morons ?
Actually, as far as I remember, 360 supports upto 5.1 in surround sound, and so far has only used Dolby Digital.
The PS3 supports upto 7.1 audio and Dolby Digital, DTS, has Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master audio support, and 7.1 PCM.
Please please please, representative of Mega-Corp "X" - read the above post and stop the madness!
If only we could all just get along.
How many millions wasted on litigation associated with IP law? A new system, or at least a major overhaul is needed.
Why can someone claim to patent "a method for scheduling a meeting?" It makes no sense to me, your Mega-Corp "X" will still make profit (maybe even MORE profit!) from a more streamlined patent system. Stop fighting each other, and start combining resources to research the next big thing, we have been stagnating while these costly legal battles have played out. Enough!
FYI, they didn't have control until yesterday, they were making some very strong suggestions prior to that. As in, "gee if I owned the company, I'd certainly value managers that did X".
Securing Windows is dirt cheap. Activate its built-in firewall, and download AVG free, Malwarebytes, and Spybot. I've been running Windows machines for 10 years, never paid a dime for security software, and I've never had a serious malware infestation.
The penguin made me do it.