Anakin Skywalker Strengths: Superfast reflexes, ability to move objects with the Force, ESP like reflexes, can jump really high. Has a lightsaber.
Weaknesses: While he's suppose to be a Jedi, he's as celibate as a Catholic Priest at a nude alter boy convention. Also, tends to get angry, then say really bad lines.
Spider-Man: Strengths: Superfast reflexes, really strong, ESP like reflexes, can jump really high. Able to climb walls and shoot web from his wrists.
Weaknesses: Can't seem to make a decent business case, hangs around stupidly while people shoot "sleeping gas" into his face. Has a cute girl hot after his body, but can't seem to make the mind-penis connection and "go for the MJ".
Personally, I think Spider-Man could win it, but only if he got "The Rage" when Anakin threatens MJ. Seeing how Anakin has his own love muffin to worry about (unless he decides he likes women who actually have a chest), I think that we'll see Anakin just barely eek out a win.
Or, since Anakin is E-vile, Spider-Man should win, since Good always truimphs over Evil (just ask the folks who used to work for Enron.)
Give away IE without paying more shipping/distribution costs. (Here, it will cost them $275 just to make the damn thing, and another chunk to ship it to all the stores.)
Threaten OEM's with reprisals if they didn't leave IE in and take Netscape out. (Here, if they go to Software Etc and threaten to them to take out the PS2's, they'll be laughed at.)
Install IE in every Windows machine by default. (Here, I don't see me getting an Xbox bundled with every TV purchase.)
I'm still comfortable with my decision to get rid of my Xbox until they produce more than one game (Halo) that I actually want to play. And by then, I'll get the Xbox for $99 and the games for $20.
As reported on The Register, which was really a repost of an article from Compuwire, AOL has announced that in its next upgrade to their AOL client for Apple's OS X, it will use Netscape by default. (And just for those who want another link, Spider-Man is cool).
Most people (well, me) assume this means that AOL is using the Macintosh crowd as a testing base, then will make the same move on the Windows side of things by changing their PC client's default from IE to Netscape. The move won't really hurt Microsoft - it will still own 80% of the browser market, and since both Netscape and Internet Explorer are free, neither company will start having shifts of money.
But this isn't so much about money, as it is about control. AOL knows that their are two reasons Microsoft pushes Internet Explorer. Control of standards, and control of eyeballs. With every Windows computer that ships, it has Internet Explorer on it. And it's home page is MSN, Microsoft's media system.
Control the Eyeballs!
Netscape, by comparison, points to Netscape.com - which contains the collective linked knowledge to all things AOL/Time Warner. Links to news articles on CNN, Cartoon Network, and all else.
It's about the eyeballs. AOL wants you to see Time/Warner stuff, Microsoft wants those eyeballs to check out MSN. Both companies have a lot to gain by keeping your attention. AOL/Time Warner wants you to know all about their movies (like the upcoming Power Puff Girls movie, or their cable channels, or their electronic entertainment partnerships, or, just as important, keeping you signed up with AOL.
MSN has its wants, with its line of cable shows, plus all of the other Microsoft goodies, like Gamezone, Hotmail, Expedia and other services - which keep you plugged into the Microsoft system, and keeps those dollars coming in.
Control the browser, control the world
Just as important as the eyeballs is the technology that drives what they see. At last year's E3 (Electronic Entertainment Expo), AOl and Sony demonstrated using AOL on the Playstation 2 system, at the same time that Sony talked about running Linux on the Playstation 2. Now, almost a year later, Sony is getting ready to start shipping their hard drive/Ethernet/modem combo unit for $150. And AOL sees a large market place - one where there are more TV's than computers, and a $200 Playstation 2 in plenty of homes.
Odds are, Microsoft isn't going to make Internet Explorer for the Playstation system (not with their own Xbox on the market) - let alone for Linux. But since AOL has been sponsoring the creation of Mozilla, the Open Source browser Netscape is based on. Mozilla has been ported to nearly every operating system in existence - Linux, Macintosh, Solaris, and, of course, Windows. And across all operating systems, it provides the same look and feel - so now it doesn't matter what operating system you're using to surf the web/check your mail/chat with your friends on - Netscape looks the same. And you can bet it will be easy enough to develop and port to the Playstation 2 as well.
The implications could drive a shift of development. Suppose you're a web developer at this second, and you want to make sure people visiting your web page see all the whiz bang stuff. Right now, you spend most of your time making sure that Internet Explorer sees the page perfectly - then concentrate on the other browsers out there. Microsoft is happy, because to make sure IE looks the best, odds are you'll use Microsoft technology, which means you're spending Microsoft money (note: not Microsoft Money - different thing).
Netscape, being built on Mozilla, is HTML 4.0 standards compliant. That means that anything written for Netscape is certain to work with every other browser out there - including Internet Explorer (as long as Microsoft codes IE to be fully HTML compliant).
So now the web developer, in a post AOL-switching-to-Netscape time, has a new choice. Program your web site for IE, then for all the others - or make your web site HTML 4.0 standards compliant, and know that all browsers will render it correct the first time. There will still be questions about plug-ins (like those who like to use Flash enabled web sites, but by changing that over to Java, which runs on as many operating systems as Mozilla, developers can code around that hurdle. HTML 4.0 standards mean that anyone's tools can be used - Open Source, proprietary, or otherwise. Which means less money to Microsoft, and more power everyone else.
Maybe the move to Netscape won't change the world overnight, or drive subscribers to AOL. But it keeps the competition between the two companies alive.
Halo was fine on the Xbox - but since I still believe MS's promise to allow Halo to come to the PC/Mac (especially the Mac), I don't see the need to spend another $300 just for one game.
Unreal Championship - I'll wait for Unreal Tournament 2003 and, again, won't have to spend $300 on the Xbox.
I'm not dissin' the big, green X - but until I see a "must have" game, I don't see the need to own one. (Now, if they brought Sakura Taisen 1-4 for the Xbox to North America, and had Rachel Lillis as a voice actor, then we'd talk.)
So, Round 1 of the console wars is over, with Sony far in 1st place, and Nintendo and the Xbox somewhere in second. (Most of my figures say Nintendo is in the 2nd place slot, but its so close nobody can tell.)
Round 2 has now begun - and it's over before it's even started. Look at the competition:
Sony - spend $150 on a 40 Gigabyte hard drive with ethernet and modem ports. Use with any ISP you with. Developers provide the servers.
The games: Final Fantasy XI, Everquest, and Star Wars: Galaxies
Nintendo - spend $35 on either an ethernet adapter, or a modem. Use with any ISP you want. Developers provide the servers.
The Games: Phantasy Star Online 1 and 2.
Xbox - spend $0 dollars - but you have to sign up for a fee (price unknown, assumed to be $5-$10 a month). Servers maintained by Microsoft (a point that kept that kept EA out of the Xbox online system.
The Games: Um....
This is why I sold my Xbox yesterday. (And have exactly enough in store credit that I could get a new one in case the Xbox comes out with something pretty damn cool.)
But so far, Sony is far and away doing the best job with online gaming, and with their partnership with AOL, and the Linux system on the PS2, I think the fears Microsoft had (as detailed in the first part of the book Opening the Xbox, where the Xbox was mainly a reaction to the fear that the PS2 would become a hoome computer), are all coming true.
Me: Hi, I'd like to ask about your Linux laptops. Salesperson: We don't have those. Me: Yes you do. I read the press releases. I can't find them on the web page. How do I buy them from you? Salesperson: I'm sorry, sir - I don't have that in my database.
Think I'm kidding? That was pretty much the experience between Dell and IBM when I called. I would up just ordering a machine and doing it myself (this being before my Powerbook days, of course).
Just saying "Hey, they had them and nobody bought them" doesn't mean *anyone could find them*. I'm not sure if that was just on purpose, or they assumed that nobody would buy them anyway so they didn't even try.
Look out there in the business world. See any companies saying "Hey, Microsoft is unfair? We should shift our stuff over and stop using them!"
No, what you see is "Well, we have to change our licensing and pay more money. We don't have any choice."
Of all the things that I don't like Microsoft for, that's the #1 thing. I see people saying "But...I can't get a Mac - it won't work with my stuff", where stuff == Microsoft Office and Adobe Acrobat. I see IT Staffs scrambling to count licenses for fear that the SBA will knock on the door and find that one computer without a piece of paper stating that Windows 2000 was paid for.
I see hopelessness, and I see just a resigned acceptance.
Learn? Why should they learn. Microsoft gets paid because people are either too lazy, or unwilling to see the alternatives. So they won't learn from their "mistakes" - until the day it hits them in the pocketbook. And that's not happening yet.
I find the whole "people buying more games for the Xbox when it first came out than the PS2" argument to be silly.
Most of the initial "Xbox purchases" were forced bundles. If you wanted an Xbox on launch date here in the US, most places would not sell you one without buying their bundle of 3 games and an extra controller.
Compare to the PS2, which shipped as was (with a DVD player, backwards compatible to the PSOne). They didn't have to force bundle, because Sony knew they would just have to bide their time.
What's happened since then? 10 million PS2's sold in the US, 30 million worldwide, and Sony still ruling the roost by having more games out there, and more sales of games than the Xbox.
I'm not saying the Xbox is a bad system, but I will say it's a poorly managed one. Their decision not to allow simple USB connections for the keyboard/mouse I think is a bad idea (I want to use a keyboard to enter my ripped CD titles, and online play without a keyboard? Forgetaboutit.), thier "pay for broadband" is going to bite them in the ass with Nintendo stating their Ethernet/Modem controllers will work with your own ISP (aka - no fee), and their (admitted - arguable) lack of more than 3 or 4 good, exclusive titles compared to the big N and the PS2 is going to keep hurting them.
Just for the interested, the G4 Powermac has an AGP slot (in mine, I have a GeForce 4 inside), and 4 (or 5 - I can't remember) PCI slots. The power supply is able to support dual processors as well.
I'm guessing the original poster looked at the new iMac, which is *not* made for power gaming, and drew his incorrect conclusions from there. Then again, being an asshole about it doesn't help.
I have to agree. I devoured Zahn's books - the creation of whats-his-face - the red-eyed, art loving Empire leader - was one of the greatest evil characters invented for the Star Wars universe.
I read those books - then one or two others - than promptly swore off all Star Wars books. While my sisters read every one (and collect the action figures and everything else), I'm content to live with the Star Wars story ending with Thrawn's death (I knew I'd remember the name).
Then again, I did read the Terry Brooks version of Episode I - after all, it was written by Terry Brooks.
I've been pondering over the recent success of Spider-Man myself after my review of the movie, and realized that one of the reasons that Spider-Man was so popular was because of the "geek hero" ethos that he personifies.
There's a certain pull to it. Everyone has felt like an outsider at some point (to greater or lesser degrees), everyone has felt powerful in some area that no one else it - and everyone has felt the tug of conflicting interests.
Movies like Spider-Man taps into that, and gives it a voice. It shows that sometimes, no matter how cool you are, you'll still be the outsider - and that's OK.
So I actually enjoyed reading Mr. Katz comments on the movie and the mythos behind it. Good to know I'm not the only person who "gets" the underlying theme of the movie (even if it is pretty campy at times.)
It's good to be popular, or for people to suddenly discover you. It gets you more money, more opportunities, and with greater exposure comes greater influence. Look at Open Source and GNU/Linux - as it's popularity has risen, business have been forced to compete, support, and develop for the system. Like the article mentions with Country Music, sometimes there's an entire market waiting to be tappd.
At the same time, there's the dark side. As publishers notice "dang - there's lots of money to be made with science fiction", you can expect a flurry of studies, marketing strategies - imagine the N'Sync of sci-fi, as one evil example. It means the corner of the universe that used to be yours - or in the case of groups, ours, is now open to the world - with all the good and bad it brings.
So while I'm hoping this promotes more interest in sci-fi books and literature, and perhaps even more funding/greater recognition for those artists, I'm also worried about what the sudden press of "marketing studies" will do, or the effects of making sci-fi "mainstream" to try and get a greater public hooked.
Most companies under the RIAA have established channels to radio, music stores, etc.
For someone else to break in and convince the already existing channels to take a) the financial risk and b) risking the wrath of the RIAA members (I'm sure RIAA folks would be more than happy to "accidently" delay shipments of the latest Backseat Boys hit CD by a few weeks to stores who don't toe the line).
The best thing the artists can do it just not play the game. Go to the MP3.com's, or use their own web sites, and encourage their fans to buy from there. Cut out the middle man.
Eventually, a collection of these can built up enough clout to challenge record companies head on. It's like a union - they'll need to build up members, power, and solidarity. (And then they'll become lazy and corrupt, but that's a different issue.)
This could be interesting for gamer types. Anyone ever play that current cop-shooting game, where the system has a body sensor that can tell if you're leaning/crouching so you can hide behind objects in a gun fight?
Now, take a dating sim like Sakura Taisen. Not only do you have to choose the right response to the question "Does this dress make me look fat?", but your facial response can have other effects.
For some games, this can be cool. Imagine an RPG where the look on your face determines your character's mood - and your response can then be read as humorous, sarcastic, serious, threatening - who knows. It will put real role playing on the computer into a new light, because you're doing more than reacting with the game, you're interacting.
Then again, the look on my face when I play FPS's look Quake is usually the same one I get when I'm sitting on the toilet, so that might not be a good thing....
Not because OSS is best in *every* situation - but because in the 80% where it is the right decision, this article explains the needs to do it right (ie - have staff that is trained, pay for support), while dismissing the fears sent by proprietary companies.
The fact is, OSS is here to stay in the business, and only by really competing (ie - coming up with a better product for the price) can businesses hope to keep profitable. Of course, with more companies (Red Hat, Suse, IBM) making a profit from Open Source, the consumer will win every time.
I could swear this article talks about the same thing....
Seriously, the thing I'm curious about is what's going to happen to the Unix divisions? Both HP and Compaq have their own flavors of Unix. Will we see a merging of the two (Join me...and together we will rule the root as father and son!) or will they decide to ditch both, and focus on a FreeBSD-GNU/Linux style solution?
There is some interesting possibilities between these two companies with their development houses and expertise - it all depends on whether they can actually make the good pieces fit together to make a better whole.
My Suck-O-Meter has been flat so far
on
Review: Spiderman
·
· Score: 3, Funny
It seems like, for the first time in a long while, somebody Gets the Comic Book Idea.
Which usually means "tight, interesting story, complex characters in the ordinary world with extraordinary circumstances, and spandex".
Now, if we can just get someone to perform a videogames2movie conversion that doesn't suck. (Well, except for Street Fighter II the Animated Movie, but that was an anime, so it doesn't count.)
Overall, Sun seems to be stuck between that proverbial rock and a hard place when it comes to Linux.
Linux is probably their #1 competitor, and #1 hope. If I have a choice between Solaris, or Red Hat, I'd pick Red Hat every time. Cheaper, runs on cheaper hardware, and I still get great support for $60 to $240 a year, as well as getting all the power of Open Source, which is making Linux more powerful every single day.
If they support Linux, then they become another fish in the ocean with IBM, HP, Red Hat, and others, and they have to compete as one. If they support Solaris, then they can make the rules - but watch as their market shares erodes thanks to that "cheap, open system".
So what can Sun do? Good question. Java is probably Sun's best product, and perhaps it would be best if IBM bought Sun and then open sourced Java to keep combatting the.Net initiative.
But either way, I love watching the competition, and that's the #1 reason why I'm glad Linux is on the market.
Serious question - I use Mozilla's mail, but I do have Entourage installed (though I don't plan on using it).
Does the Microsoft Office X run those annoying e-mail visual basic scripts? Since this virus uses the MAPI system, I wouldn't think that OS X systems have anything to worry about.
Slashdot Mirror
The contendors:
Anakin Skywalker
Strengths: Superfast reflexes, ability to move objects with the Force, ESP like reflexes, can jump really high.
Has a lightsaber.
Weaknesses:
While he's suppose to be a Jedi, he's as celibate as a Catholic Priest at a nude alter boy convention. Also, tends to get angry, then say really bad lines.
Spider-Man:
Strengths: Superfast reflexes, really strong, ESP like reflexes, can jump really high. Able to climb walls and shoot web from his wrists.
Weaknesses: Can't seem to make a decent business case, hangs around stupidly while people shoot "sleeping gas" into his face. Has a cute girl hot after his body, but can't seem to make the mind-penis connection and "go for the MJ".
Personally, I think Spider-Man could win it, but only if he got "The Rage" when Anakin threatens MJ. Seeing how Anakin has his own love muffin to worry about (unless he decides he likes women who actually have a chest), I think that we'll see Anakin just barely eek out a win.
Or, since Anakin is E-vile, Spider-Man should win, since Good always truimphs over Evil (just ask the folks who used to work for Enron.)
And, they could:
Give away IE without paying more shipping/distribution costs. (Here, it will cost them $275 just to make the damn thing, and another chunk to ship it to all the stores.)
Threaten OEM's with reprisals if they didn't leave IE in and take Netscape out. (Here, if they go to Software Etc and threaten to them to take out the PS2's, they'll be laughed at.)
Install IE in every Windows machine by default. (Here, I don't see me getting an Xbox bundled with every TV purchase.)
I'm still comfortable with my decision to get rid of my Xbox until they produce more than one game (Halo) that I actually want to play. And by then, I'll get the Xbox for $99 and the games for $20.
If I want filtered, non-personality news - I go to CNN.
If I want news from people who share my interests, loves, fears, desires, hopes - I go to Slashdot.
I imported it from Europe - English included :).
As reported on The Register, which was really a repost of an article from Compuwire, AOL has announced that in its next upgrade to their AOL client for Apple's OS X, it will use Netscape by default. (And just for those who want another link, Spider-Man is cool).
Most people (well, me) assume this means that AOL is using the Macintosh crowd as a testing base, then will make the same move on the Windows side of things by changing their PC client's default from IE to Netscape. The move won't really hurt Microsoft - it will still own 80% of the browser market, and since both Netscape and Internet Explorer are free, neither company will start having shifts of money.
But this isn't so much about money, as it is about control. AOL knows that their are two reasons Microsoft pushes Internet Explorer. Control of standards, and control of eyeballs. With every Windows computer that ships, it has Internet Explorer on it. And it's home page is MSN, Microsoft's media system.
Control the Eyeballs!
Netscape, by comparison, points to Netscape.com - which contains the collective linked knowledge to all things AOL/Time Warner. Links to news articles on CNN, Cartoon Network, and all else.
It's about the eyeballs. AOL wants you to see Time/Warner stuff, Microsoft wants those eyeballs to check out MSN. Both companies have a lot to gain by keeping your attention. AOL/Time Warner wants you to know all about their movies (like the upcoming Power Puff Girls movie, or their cable channels, or their electronic entertainment partnerships, or, just as important, keeping you signed up with AOL.
MSN has its wants, with its line of cable shows, plus all of the other Microsoft goodies, like Gamezone, Hotmail, Expedia and other services - which keep you plugged into the Microsoft system, and keeps those dollars coming in.
Control the browser, control the world
Just as important as the eyeballs is the technology that drives what they see. At last year's E3 (Electronic Entertainment Expo), AOl and Sony demonstrated using AOL on the Playstation 2 system, at the same time that Sony talked about running Linux on the Playstation 2. Now, almost a year later, Sony is getting ready to start shipping their hard drive/Ethernet/modem combo unit for $150. And AOL sees a large market place - one where there are more TV's than computers, and a $200 Playstation 2 in plenty of homes.
Odds are, Microsoft isn't going to make Internet Explorer for the Playstation system (not with their own Xbox on the market) - let alone for Linux. But since AOL has been sponsoring the creation of Mozilla, the Open Source browser Netscape is based on. Mozilla has been ported to nearly every operating system in existence - Linux, Macintosh, Solaris, and, of course, Windows. And across all operating systems, it provides the same look and feel - so now it doesn't matter what operating system you're using to surf the web/check your mail/chat with your friends on - Netscape looks the same. And you can bet it will be easy enough to develop and port to the Playstation 2 as well.
The implications could drive a shift of development. Suppose you're a web developer at this second, and you want to make sure people visiting your web page see all the whiz bang stuff. Right now, you spend most of your time making sure that Internet Explorer sees the page perfectly - then concentrate on the other browsers out there. Microsoft is happy, because to make sure IE looks the best, odds are you'll use Microsoft technology, which means you're spending Microsoft money (note: not Microsoft Money - different thing).
Netscape, being built on Mozilla, is HTML 4.0 standards compliant. That means that anything written for Netscape is certain to work with every other browser out there - including Internet Explorer (as long as Microsoft codes IE to be fully HTML compliant).
So now the web developer, in a post AOL-switching-to-Netscape time, has a new choice. Program your web site for IE, then for all the others - or make your web site HTML 4.0 standards compliant, and know that all browsers will render it correct the first time. There will still be questions about plug-ins (like those who like to use Flash enabled web sites, but by changing that over to Java, which runs on as many operating systems as Mozilla, developers can code around that hurdle. HTML 4.0 standards mean that anyone's tools can be used - Open Source, proprietary, or otherwise. Which means less money to Microsoft, and more power everyone else.
Maybe the move to Netscape won't change the world overnight, or drive subscribers to AOL. But it keeps the competition between the two companies alive.
And for most of us, competition is a good thing.
As always, I'm John "Dark Paladin" Hummel. And that's my opinion.
Now, I want you to think about this very hard.
Lindows is Linux with some Wine updates to run Microsoft software on Linux.
Linux was created by Linus Torvalds to be a replacement for Minux.
Minux was based off of Unix.
Unix was not a spin-off of Microsoft's technology.
Please, either redraft your statement so it makes sense, or research before talking.
Halo was fine on the Xbox - but since I still believe MS's promise to allow Halo to come to the PC/Mac (especially the Mac), I don't see the need to spend another $300 just for one game.
Unreal Championship - I'll wait for Unreal Tournament 2003 and, again, won't have to spend $300 on the Xbox.
I'm not dissin' the big, green X - but until I see a "must have" game, I don't see the need to own one. (Now, if they brought Sakura Taisen 1-4 for the Xbox to North America, and had Rachel Lillis as a voice actor, then we'd talk.)
So, Round 1 of the console wars is over, with Sony far in 1st place, and Nintendo and the Xbox somewhere in second. (Most of my figures say Nintendo is in the 2nd place slot, but its so close nobody can tell.)
Round 2 has now begun - and it's over before it's even started. Look at the competition:
Sony - spend $150 on a 40 Gigabyte hard drive with ethernet and modem ports. Use with any ISP you with. Developers provide the servers.
The games: Final Fantasy XI, Everquest, and Star Wars: Galaxies
Nintendo - spend $35 on either an ethernet adapter, or a modem. Use with any ISP you want. Developers provide the servers.
The Games: Phantasy Star Online 1 and 2.
Xbox - spend $0 dollars - but you have to sign up for a fee (price unknown, assumed to be $5-$10 a month). Servers maintained by Microsoft (a point that kept that kept EA out of the Xbox online system.
The Games: Um....
This is why I sold my Xbox yesterday. (And have exactly enough in store credit that I could get a new one in case the Xbox comes out with something pretty damn cool.)
But so far, Sony is far and away doing the best job with online gaming, and with their partnership with AOL, and the Linux system on the PS2, I think the fears Microsoft had (as detailed in the first part of the book Opening the Xbox, where the Xbox was mainly a reaction to the fear that the PS2 would become a hoome computer), are all coming true.
They couldn't even find them. When you call Dell:
Me: Hi, I'd like to ask about your Linux laptops.
Salesperson: We don't have those.
Me: Yes you do. I read the press releases. I can't find them on the web page. How do I buy them from you?
Salesperson: I'm sorry, sir - I don't have that in my database.
Think I'm kidding? That was pretty much the experience between Dell and IBM when I called. I would up just ordering a machine and doing it myself (this being before my Powerbook days, of course).
Just saying "Hey, they had them and nobody bought them" doesn't mean *anyone could find them*. I'm not sure if that was just on purpose, or they assumed that nobody would buy them anyway so they didn't even try.
Actually, they do something. In the recent BeOS case, they say:
"Dell, either you knock it the fuck off with this BeOS thing, or we'll charge you double for Windows".
Dell needs Microsoft. Microsoft can do business with Gateway, Dell, HPQ, Micron (do they still make PC's), and a host of others.
Margins are razor thin, and if MS decided to play hardball with Dell, Dell would lose.
That's why Red Hat's complaining - and they're right. That's what the trial is suppose to fix.
Because it doesn't hurt them.
Look out there in the business world. See any companies saying "Hey, Microsoft is unfair? We should shift our stuff over and stop using them!"
No, what you see is "Well, we have to change our licensing and pay more money. We don't have any choice."
Of all the things that I don't like Microsoft for, that's the #1 thing. I see people saying "But...I can't get a Mac - it won't work with my stuff", where stuff == Microsoft Office and Adobe Acrobat. I see IT Staffs scrambling to count licenses for fear that the SBA will knock on the door and find that one computer without a piece of paper stating that Windows 2000 was paid for.
I see hopelessness, and I see just a resigned acceptance.
Learn? Why should they learn. Microsoft gets paid because people are either too lazy, or unwilling to see the alternatives. So they won't learn from their "mistakes" - until the day it hits them in the pocketbook. And that's not happening yet.
If ever.
I find the whole "people buying more games for the Xbox when it first came out than the PS2" argument to be silly.
Most of the initial "Xbox purchases" were forced bundles. If you wanted an Xbox on launch date here in the US, most places would not sell you one without buying their bundle of 3 games and an extra controller.
Compare to the PS2, which shipped as was (with a DVD player, backwards compatible to the PSOne). They didn't have to force bundle, because Sony knew they would just have to bide their time.
What's happened since then? 10 million PS2's sold in the US, 30 million worldwide, and Sony still ruling the roost by having more games out there, and more sales of games than the Xbox.
I'm not saying the Xbox is a bad system, but I will say it's a poorly managed one. Their decision not to allow simple USB connections for the keyboard/mouse I think is a bad idea (I want to use a keyboard to enter my ripped CD titles, and online play without a keyboard? Forgetaboutit.), thier "pay for broadband" is going to bite them in the ass with Nintendo stating their Ethernet/Modem controllers will work with your own ISP (aka - no fee), and their (admitted - arguable) lack of more than 3 or 4 good, exclusive titles compared to the big N and the PS2 is going to keep hurting them.
Just for the interested, the G4 Powermac has an AGP slot (in mine, I have a GeForce 4 inside), and 4 (or 5 - I can't remember) PCI slots. The power supply is able to support dual processors as well.
I'm guessing the original poster looked at the new iMac, which is *not* made for power gaming, and drew his incorrect conclusions from there. Then again, being an asshole about it doesn't help.
Hm...
Anakin becomes Darth Vader.
Yeah, I had never guessed that Anakin was going to give into the Dark Side at some point.
My bad.
I have to agree. I devoured Zahn's books - the creation of whats-his-face - the red-eyed, art loving Empire leader - was one of the greatest evil characters invented for the Star Wars universe.
I read those books - then one or two others - than promptly swore off all Star Wars books. While my sisters read every one (and collect the action figures and everything else), I'm content to live with the Star Wars story ending with Thrawn's death (I knew I'd remember the name).
Then again, I did read the Terry Brooks version of Episode I - after all, it was written by Terry Brooks.
Actually, I totally disagree with that.
I've been pondering over the recent success of Spider-Man myself after my review of the movie, and realized that one of the reasons that Spider-Man was so popular was because of the "geek hero" ethos that he personifies.
There's a certain pull to it. Everyone has felt like an outsider at some point (to greater or lesser degrees), everyone has felt powerful in some area that no one else it - and everyone has felt the tug of conflicting interests.
Movies like Spider-Man taps into that, and gives it a voice. It shows that sometimes, no matter how cool you are, you'll still be the outsider - and that's OK.
So I actually enjoyed reading Mr. Katz comments on the movie and the mythos behind it. Good to know I'm not the only person who "gets" the underlying theme of the movie (even if it is pretty campy at times.)
It's good to be popular, or for people to suddenly discover you. It gets you more money, more opportunities, and with greater exposure comes greater influence. Look at Open Source and GNU/Linux - as it's popularity has risen, business have been forced to compete, support, and develop for the system. Like the article mentions with Country Music, sometimes there's an entire market waiting to be tappd.
At the same time, there's the dark side. As publishers notice "dang - there's lots of money to be made with science fiction", you can expect a flurry of studies, marketing strategies - imagine the N'Sync of sci-fi, as one evil example. It means the corner of the universe that used to be yours - or in the case of groups, ours, is now open to the world - with all the good and bad it brings.
So while I'm hoping this promotes more interest in sci-fi books and literature, and perhaps even more funding/greater recognition for those artists, I'm also worried about what the sudden press of "marketing studies" will do, or the effects of making sci-fi "mainstream" to try and get a greater public hooked.
Of course, I could be wrong.
Money, and distribution channels.
Most companies under the RIAA have established channels to radio, music stores, etc.
For someone else to break in and convince the already existing channels to take a) the financial risk and b) risking the wrath of the RIAA members (I'm sure RIAA folks would be more than happy to "accidently" delay shipments of the latest Backseat Boys hit CD by a few weeks to stores who don't toe the line).
The best thing the artists can do it just not play the game. Go to the MP3.com's, or use their own web sites, and encourage their fans to buy from there. Cut out the middle man.
Eventually, a collection of these can built up enough clout to challenge record companies head on. It's like a union - they'll need to build up members, power, and solidarity. (And then they'll become lazy and corrupt, but that's a different issue.)
This could be interesting for gamer types. Anyone ever play that current cop-shooting game, where the system has a body sensor that can tell if you're leaning/crouching so you can hide behind objects in a gun fight?
Now, take a dating sim like Sakura Taisen. Not only do you have to choose the right response to the question "Does this dress make me look fat?", but your facial response can have other effects.
For some games, this can be cool. Imagine an RPG where the look on your face determines your character's mood - and your response can then be read as humorous, sarcastic, serious, threatening - who knows. It will put real role playing on the computer into a new light, because you're doing more than reacting with the game, you're interacting.
Then again, the look on my face when I play FPS's look Quake is usually the same one I get when I'm sitting on the toilet, so that might not be a good thing....
Not because OSS is best in *every* situation - but because in the 80% where it is the right decision, this article explains the needs to do it right (ie - have staff that is trained, pay for support), while dismissing the fears sent by proprietary companies.
The fact is, OSS is here to stay in the business, and only by really competing (ie - coming up with a better product for the price) can businesses hope to keep profitable. Of course, with more companies (Red Hat, Suse, IBM) making a profit from Open Source, the consumer will win every time.
Ah, competition. How I love thee.
I could swear this article talks about the same thing....
Seriously, the thing I'm curious about is what's going to happen to the Unix divisions? Both HP and Compaq have their own flavors of Unix. Will we see a merging of the two (Join me...and together we will rule the root as father and son!) or will they decide to ditch both, and focus on a FreeBSD-GNU/Linux style solution?
There is some interesting possibilities between these two companies with their development houses and expertise - it all depends on whether they can actually make the good pieces fit together to make a better whole.
It seems like, for the first time in a long while, somebody Gets the Comic Book Idea.
Which usually means "tight, interesting story, complex characters in the ordinary world with extraordinary circumstances, and spandex".
Now, if we can just get someone to perform a videogames2movie conversion that doesn't suck. (Well, except for Street Fighter II the Animated Movie, but that was an anime, so it doesn't count.)
Overall, Sun seems to be stuck between that proverbial rock and a hard place when it comes to Linux.
.Net initiative.
Linux is probably their #1 competitor, and #1 hope. If I have a choice between Solaris, or Red Hat, I'd pick Red Hat every time. Cheaper, runs on cheaper hardware, and I still get great support for $60 to $240 a year, as well as getting all the power of Open Source, which is making Linux more powerful every single day.
If they support Linux, then they become another fish in the ocean with IBM, HP, Red Hat, and others, and they have to compete as one. If they support Solaris, then they can make the rules - but watch as their market shares erodes thanks to that "cheap, open system".
So what can Sun do? Good question. Java is probably Sun's best product, and perhaps it would be best if IBM bought Sun and then open sourced Java to keep combatting the
But either way, I love watching the competition, and that's the #1 reason why I'm glad Linux is on the market.
Serious question - I use Mozilla's mail, but I do have Entourage installed (though I don't plan on using it).
Does the Microsoft Office X run those annoying e-mail visual basic scripts? Since this virus uses the MAPI system, I wouldn't think that OS X systems have anything to worry about.