Although your comparison between a Wii marked-up on ebay vs. the retail price of the cheaper PS3 is spectacular, I still don't see how this has anything to do with what the GP was talking about. The GP is explaining that the PS3's (retail) price includes the price of development of their browser, whereas the Wii doesn't because they separate the browser from the system as an optional upgrade. It doesn't matter what they are going for on ebay since Nintendo or Sony do not make any extra money from ebay auctions.
Actually, I would like to know how Joe Vista-User will navigate to this site to begin with--let alone read it, understand it, and take a stand against it.
You're right, but your comment read more like you were referring to the Wii's American launch than Japan's. Sorry, I didn't mean to get you all worked up. Let's all take a deep breathe and relax--it's friday.
'Less than a month' is too broad for defining twelve days. It would be like saying "the average high school student spends less than 12 years in high school."
If they were to say, post your documents to their homepage at google.com, you can sue them for reproducing your work as you still maintain copyright of the document. The terms of service allows them to host the file on their servers and display it to you or whom you see fit. I understand words can be twisted and loops can be jumped through..as with basically any legal document, but I don't understand why this is a concern. First off, it's google, who has a pretty good history and second off, what advantage could they possibly gain by redistributing your documents? For instance: WoW's TOS says that you do not own your account or any items that your account has, but Blizzard isn't going to randomly start taking things away from people and deleting accounts for no reason. This is bad business and anyone wanting to keep profits high would not backstab their customers like that.
And I read through Gmail's TOS and found this at the top:
Google may, in its sole discretion, modify or revise these terms and conditions and policies at any time, and you agree to be bound by such modifications or revisions. If you do not accept and abide by this Agreement, you may not use the Google Mail service.
If you don't trust google docs, then you shouldn't trust gmail either since, according to this, they can change whatever they want to in the tos, without notifying you first, and then do anything they want with your email.
That's very interesting, but that's nothing new/special. It's just a way to cover themselves in the unlikely event a server dies and someone's files are gone. They don't want people suing them because they lost a document or someone hacked the server and was able to view it. It doesn't seem very odd for a free service to have such an agreement. I think the bigger question is whether or not they would act on any of these terms. Is it in their best interest to randomly delete files or publish/distribute them? Absolutely not.
A little offtopic: Does gmail have the same type of agreement? (just curious since I use it for most of my email accounts)
Currently that's why I don't use Google's doc and spreadsheet programs. I can't stand not having control of my own documents.
How do you not have control of your documents through Google's doc and spreadsheet programs? If anything, you have MORE control as you can access them from anywhere and can assign permissions to different docs so others can edit them too. You can also save the documents to your computer in practically any format you'd like. I cannot think of one problem with Google docs besides the fact that it doesn't offer some of the advanced features/settings that other programs do. Considering they are new to the scene and it's used in your web browser, I'd say it's pretty good. I can't imagine anyone using these web apps independently of other office suites, but I think it is a good addition as it does make things very accessible.
that sucks - i dont know if anyone else has had to put together a very larger power point on a mac book pro, but it is freaking slow. When the file hits 70megs it starts to hit a crawl.
its a pain in my ass
I don't know what's worse: being the one making a 70MB+ powerpoint presentation or the one forced to sit through it!
Stop taking the statement out of context. This is an article about Vista and the paragraph in which this statement lies discusses Windows XP and the fact the interface looks old compared to OSX and Vista. Since the article is about Vista, of course it's going to define other things in terms of Vista. That in no way suggests that OSX had stolen or copied Vista in any way, simply, he is comparing the two interfaces using the one the article is about as the source for the comparison. Hopefully, this explanation is enough. If you would like further reasons as to why I'm right, please see your sixth grade English teacher.
Here's the whole paragraph--to put it in more context:
XP: Ridiculed as being the 'Fischer Price' version of the Windows 2000 interface, Windows XP was still a fresh update upon its release 5 years ago. Today, however, will still perfectly functional, it is starting to look a little long in the tooth, with Apple's Mac OS X offering Vista like graphics for several years already.
It never states that OS X copied Vista, simply that the graphical user interface used in Vista has a likeness to OS X--which has been around for several years.
Anyway, I think any Vista guide is going to have a certain slant one way or the other. Either some Linux/Mac guru is going to come out bashing Vista for everything that it's "stolen" and the minimum system requirements or some Microsoft fanboy is going to claim how wonderful it is and how justified the upgrade is to run such a purdy OS.
Sega never sold the number of consoles Sony has, and I don't remember there ever being the hype around the Dreamcast as there has been around the PS3. If you're going to compare any system to the Dreamcast, I suggest going with the 360 (early release, low console sales, everyone waiting around to see what the new PlayStation has to offer).
Also, Sega was desperate at the time to make a console that didn't completely suck sales-wise (32X, Game Gear, Saturn come to mind). Sony isn't really that desperate since they've been the leader for the past two generations and have come to have a large consumer following, and a long list of companies willing to produce games for them.
Ford (Microsoft) sells all of their vehicles with their proprietary radio system (Internet Explorer). Any customer can install their own after market radio (Firefox, etc) after purchasing a Ford vehicle, but let's face it, most of them won't and will use the one included in the car. Let's say these radios have several defects that compromise the entire car (this radio is wired to different sensors and components in the car to display useful feedback on the LCD screen). Now, anyone with a transmitter, can decide to send certain signals over the airwaves that, when picked up by this Ford radio, will set fire to the car and require the car to be fixed or replaced.
I'm not really sure what D&D was like back in the day, as I was not around then, but I do know from experience that people play WoW 15+ hours a day. If you guys were playing D&D that long back then, then I would have to say you guys-at least somewhat-lost touch of the reality around you.
Bill makes a great point. Most hardcore gamers are not in touch with reality. I've had two roommates fail out of college because WoW consumed their lives and they forgot when class was; what tests were on; what time it was; how long its been since they last showered, ate, or slept. And I'm only in my 3rd semester. Let's face it, kids today would rather go fishing in a video game (see: Zelda for Wii) than in real life. They would rather farm gold for hours on end instead of make real money. It's too bad.
So, if I were to write something libel about you in the comments section of a/. article, you can sue/. You can however, come after me. If a third party news site picks up and reports based on what I posted, you can go after them either. You can only come after the original source, in this case, me.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think you were ever taught sarcasm. Here's a tutorial. Hope this helps!
Although your comparison between a Wii marked-up on ebay vs. the retail price of the cheaper PS3 is spectacular, I still don't see how this has anything to do with what the GP was talking about. The GP is explaining that the PS3's (retail) price includes the price of development of their browser, whereas the Wii doesn't because they separate the browser from the system as an optional upgrade. It doesn't matter what they are going for on ebay since Nintendo or Sony do not make any extra money from ebay auctions.
Actually, I would like to know how Joe Vista-User will navigate to this site to begin with--let alone read it, understand it, and take a stand against it.
You're right, but your comment read more like you were referring to the Wii's American launch than Japan's. Sorry, I didn't mean to get you all worked up. Let's all take a deep breathe and relax--it's friday.
'Less than a month' is too broad for defining twelve days. It would be like saying "the average high school student spends less than 12 years in high school."
Actually, this article is about Japan, so the Wii has only been out for 12 days.
If they were to say, post your documents to their homepage at google.com, you can sue them for reproducing your work as you still maintain copyright of the document. The terms of service allows them to host the file on their servers and display it to you or whom you see fit. I understand words can be twisted and loops can be jumped through..as with basically any legal document, but I don't understand why this is a concern. First off, it's google, who has a pretty good history and second off, what advantage could they possibly gain by redistributing your documents? For instance: WoW's TOS says that you do not own your account or any items that your account has, but Blizzard isn't going to randomly start taking things away from people and deleting accounts for no reason. This is bad business and anyone wanting to keep profits high would not backstab their customers like that.
And I read through Gmail's TOS and found this at the top:
If you don't trust google docs, then you shouldn't trust gmail either since, according to this, they can change whatever they want to in the tos, without notifying you first, and then do anything they want with your email.
That's very interesting, but that's nothing new/special. It's just a way to cover themselves in the unlikely event a server dies and someone's files are gone. They don't want people suing them because they lost a document or someone hacked the server and was able to view it. It doesn't seem very odd for a free service to have such an agreement. I think the bigger question is whether or not they would act on any of these terms. Is it in their best interest to randomly delete files or publish/distribute them? Absolutely not.
A little offtopic: Does gmail have the same type of agreement? (just curious since I use it for most of my email accounts)
How do you not have control of your documents through Google's doc and spreadsheet programs? If anything, you have MORE control as you can access them from anywhere and can assign permissions to different docs so others can edit them too. You can also save the documents to your computer in practically any format you'd like. I cannot think of one problem with Google docs besides the fact that it doesn't offer some of the advanced features/settings that other programs do. Considering they are new to the scene and it's used in your web browser, I'd say it's pretty good. I can't imagine anyone using these web apps independently of other office suites, but I think it is a good addition as it does make things very accessible.
I don't know what's worse: being the one making a 70MB+ powerpoint presentation or the one forced to sit through it!
Of course Vista will be a cure for global warming! Think of all of the computers that will be rendered useless by this OS and will be powered down.
Paragraphs are fun.
And a great way to break up thoughts.
But each sentence,
does not need its own
paragraph.
I _never_ found the _underscore_ as _annoying_ as it is in _your_post_.
Stop taking the statement out of context. This is an article about Vista and the paragraph in which this statement lies discusses Windows XP and the fact the interface looks old compared to OSX and Vista. Since the article is about Vista, of course it's going to define other things in terms of Vista. That in no way suggests that OSX had stolen or copied Vista in any way, simply, he is comparing the two interfaces using the one the article is about as the source for the comparison. Hopefully, this explanation is enough. If you would like further reasons as to why I'm right, please see your sixth grade English teacher.
Here's the whole paragraph--to put it in more context:
It never states that OS X copied Vista, simply that the graphical user interface used in Vista has a likeness to OS X--which has been around for several years.
Anyway, I think any Vista guide is going to have a certain slant one way or the other. Either some Linux/Mac guru is going to come out bashing Vista for everything that it's "stolen" and the minimum system requirements or some Microsoft fanboy is going to claim how wonderful it is and how justified the upgrade is to run such a purdy OS.
Sega never sold the number of consoles Sony has, and I don't remember there ever being the hype around the Dreamcast as there has been around the PS3. If you're going to compare any system to the Dreamcast, I suggest going with the 360 (early release, low console sales, everyone waiting around to see what the new PlayStation has to offer).
Also, Sega was desperate at the time to make a console that didn't completely suck sales-wise (32X, Game Gear, Saturn come to mind). Sony isn't really that desperate since they've been the leader for the past two generations and have come to have a large consumer following, and a long list of companies willing to produce games for them.
I think the better analogy would be this:
Ford (Microsoft) sells all of their vehicles with their proprietary radio system (Internet Explorer). Any customer can install their own after market radio (Firefox, etc) after purchasing a Ford vehicle, but let's face it, most of them won't and will use the one included in the car. Let's say these radios have several defects that compromise the entire car (this radio is wired to different sensors and components in the car to display useful feedback on the LCD screen). Now, anyone with a transmitter, can decide to send certain signals over the airwaves that, when picked up by this Ford radio, will set fire to the car and require the car to be fixed or replaced.
I have no doubt the Wii would win the third gen console war. Too bad it's competing in the seventh generation.
Sony could just as easily say 18 in 1 million batteries, cameras, etc of theirs are considered defective too
Indeed. Your point?
I, for one, agree.
I'm not really sure what D&D was like back in the day, as I was not around then, but I do know from experience that people play WoW 15+ hours a day. If you guys were playing D&D that long back then, then I would have to say you guys-at least somewhat-lost touch of the reality around you.
Bill makes a great point. Most hardcore gamers are not in touch with reality. I've had two roommates fail out of college because WoW consumed their lives and they forgot when class was; what tests were on; what time it was; how long its been since they last showered, ate, or slept. And I'm only in my 3rd semester. Let's face it, kids today would rather go fishing in a video game (see: Zelda for Wii) than in real life. They would rather farm gold for hours on end instead of make real money. It's too bad.
I think your post is missing a few 't.