That's because prior to now, there was no real demand for DVD-Rs. As demand scales up, suppliers will sell more of the discs and will start to undercut each other to gain greater market share. As more of these drives hit the market, prices will drop on the media...
300 hrs worth would be the marginal cost, but what if you just ran the client in the background while the computer was going to be on anyway? You would need to factor the money "earned" during that period in any calculation of profit to be made.
if you graph knowledge on the X axis and time on the Y axis, you end up with the proper "steep learning curve is bad" graph--but there's lots of games you can play with graphs...
I'm excited about the potential for watch-based applications. A "book of matches"-sized Gb drive is small enough for people to start developing mp3 player watches, personal communication watches, etc... I can't wait for the future!
Not true. There are plenty of otherwise very intelligent people who are afraid to explore their computer for fear of "breaking something". There is a significant investment of time associated with learning a new skill (computer-related or otherwise) and people want things to work. There is risk associated with exploration, and many users won't take that risk for the simple reason that if they screw up they're met with condescending support people like yourself who can't understand why some people are so "_stupid_". It's very easy to criticize--why not try and help the users instead? Encourage people to experiment and don't be afraid to help them when (not if) they screw up. That makes for a better computing environment for everyone. Try to remember your roots--nobody is born a guru. Everybody needs help along the way.
Splitting the company up just seems like an appealing way of hurting them. It doesn't seem like it is doing anything constructive.
Microsoft's biggest sin was (and is) leveraging the success of one of their products in order to compel people to use another of their products. This of course has a cumulative effect. Breaking up the company into 3 or 4 smaller companies would help by greatly reducing their power to leverage. This is itself, while not explicitly hurting Microsoft, would be beneficial to the rest of the software community.
Opening the MS Windows source code would be a great thing for Linux acceptance. I believe that one of the things (if not the most important thing) keeping Linux off the desktop market is the high cost of switching over to a whole new set of applications. It seems to me that if the complete Windows source code were published, then Wine (or another analogous project) could provide a seamless runtime environment for windows executables. If Linux could run all of the legacy Windows apps, then people wouldn't have to learn a new host of apps--they could continue to run their old ones. Of course this presents the problem of future apps, if (when) MS were to retool their code... but 1/2 a glass of water is better than no water at all. While I can't see how releasing the code is inherrently bad for Micros~1, it would certainly be a boon for Linux companies who are trying to maximize sales.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone know why Apache's lead is narrowing in the server battle? According to this graph, Apache has dipped recently and Microsoft has surged.
That's because prior to now, there was no real demand for DVD-Rs. As demand scales up, suppliers will sell more of the discs and will start to undercut each other to gain greater market share. As more of these drives hit the market, prices will drop on the media...
Gavin
Is there any hope for anti-aliasing in XF4.0?
-Gavin
Will this in-flight Internet and e-mail be accessible via an RJ-45 jack, or will there be terminals installed in the seats?
300 hrs worth would be the marginal cost, but what if you just ran the client in the background while the computer was going to be on anyway? You would need to factor the money "earned" during that period in any calculation of profit to be made.
if you graph knowledge on the X axis and time on the Y axis, you end up with the proper "steep learning curve is bad" graph--but there's lots of games you can play with graphs...
I'm excited about the potential for watch-based applications. A "book of matches"-sized Gb drive is small enough for people to start developing mp3 player watches, personal communication watches, etc... I can't wait for the future!
Not true. There are plenty of otherwise very intelligent people who are afraid to explore their computer for fear of "breaking something". There is a significant investment of time associated with learning a new skill (computer-related or otherwise) and people want things to work. There is risk associated with exploration, and many users won't take that risk for the simple reason that if they screw up they're met with condescending support people like yourself who can't understand why some people are so "_stupid_". It's very easy to criticize--why not try and help the users instead? Encourage people to experiment and don't be afraid to help them when (not if) they screw up. That makes for a better computing environment for everyone. Try to remember your roots--nobody is born a guru. Everybody needs help along the way.
Splitting the company up just seems like an appealing way of hurting them. It doesn't seem like it is doing anything constructive.
Microsoft's biggest sin was (and is) leveraging the success of one of their products in order to compel people to use another of their products. This of course has a cumulative effect. Breaking up the company into 3 or 4 smaller companies would help by greatly reducing their power to leverage. This is itself, while not explicitly hurting Microsoft, would be beneficial to the rest of the software community.
Opening the MS Windows source code would be a great thing for Linux acceptance. I believe that one of the things (if not the most important thing) keeping Linux off the desktop market is the high cost of switching over to a whole new set of applications. It seems to me that if the complete Windows source code were published, then Wine (or another analogous project) could provide a seamless runtime environment for windows executables. If Linux could run all of the legacy Windows apps, then people wouldn't have to learn a new host of apps--they could continue to run their old ones. Of course this presents the problem of future apps, if (when) MS were to retool their code... but 1/2 a glass of water is better than no water at all. While I can't see how releasing the code is inherrently bad for Micros~1, it would certainly be a boon for Linux companies who are trying to maximize sales.