While (ironically) Symantec's products aren't much better, I wouldn't rely on a free antivirus product either. Especially AVG *shiver*.
Right now Kaspersky seems to be doing a very good job, but I find relying on one brand / product when it comes to utility software is a little foolish. Too often the product gets bloated or the developers stop investing as much into development or something better comes along. I pay for my antivirus and every year I do a little research before buying another subscription.
Just as it is true that opensource and freeware softwares are not inherently worse or less powerful than software you have to pay for, it is also true that they are not inherently better or more powerful either, and I don't understand how this statement by a software company CEO is deemed newsworthy.
It's funny because Sony Online Entertainment seems to do pretty well.
Sony reminds me a lot of Apple. Though Apple clearly has a different view on the internet and has done a great job making money from online services, their corporate ideology seems to be very similar.
Both Sony and Apple love proprietary technology and trapping this customers into using their products and services. Like making it a massive challenge for a layman to use anything other than iTunes with their iPod, or making it very difficult to sync my iPod from one machine to the next. Or not allowing me to run Apple OS on whatever computer I wish, etc. As for Sony, everything from ATRAC to Sony Memory Sticks to the Cleo's just try to lock you into Sony. Not only that, but when I bought a brand new Sony MP3 phone last year, I realized that I can't play an MP3 without DRM on it! Over the years I've ripped a lot of my old CD's and now I had to use third party software to trick my MP3 phone into playing my MP3's because the phone was designed not to play something without DRM. That is unacceptable. I won't even get into the whole rootkit bs from a few years ago. There is a very large difference between creating a full range of services to try to capitalize on all your customers needs and from giving them limited functionality on products they purchase. I bought the fucking phone, I will play whatever the fuck I want to play on it, end of story.
To me, what this shows is a very scary Daddy Knows Best philosophy on the part of these companies and others like them. They believe that as a consumer, I am not to be trusted and that the products they sell me must be crippled, because I'm a deviant individual and will steal from them. The irony here is, those people who really want to use their products to their full potential simply just have to do a google search and see how it's done, all Sony is doing is making it a bigger pain in the ass for those people who are less tech savvy or who do not use pirated music or software.
Regardless, this is why I have stopped buying Sony or Apple products. We live in an age where 100 people walking around with anti Sony billboards won't do anything but if the same group stop buying Sony products, and educate their friends and family to do the same, it may eventually start showing in the bottom line.
I'm very optimistic about it all however because for every Sony or Apple out there, there are many other great technology companies that don't gimp their products. Eventually, enough people will catch on and these companies will understand that they must stop trying to fight the internet and start trying to find new ways to be competitive.
It's ironic that Mr. Lynton complains about consumers feeling entitled to getting free entertainment, because he seems to believe he is entitled to keep the same aging business model and not make any new or innovative changes to the services his company provides, and still make the same amount of money. Hardware electronic companies will eventually learn that the internet is here to stay and that there is no real way to fight it. What they must do is stay ahead of the technology and offer new and unique products and services to their consumers. Apple did and is doing a great job with iTunes, and if they didn't lock me into the software they way they do I would still be buying from them. Sony needs to wake up, hire a CEO who actually get's it, and completely reposition itself.
How is this news? Consoles were built on exclusive content, all gamers know that. You can't play Sonic on SNES, you can't play Mario on Sega Genesis, etc.
This story is CLEARLY false because I've been told by various marketting materials that Macs do NOT get viruses and are way too young-and-hip-and-sexy to be involved in something like a bot-whatchamacallit DOS attack thing.
BRB going to fire up my iTunes on my iMac and plug in my iPod so I can transfer some songs I downloaded on my iPhone.
When you're buying a Kindle, you're purchasing a device that:
1) *Insert all technical features of Kindle*
2) Allows you to easily purchase publications and subscriptions from Amazons website.
By removing his account, they have effectively broken his Kindle by removing functionality that is part of the original specification.
It's like buying an XM Radio receiver and having your account deleted. Yes, the receiver still "works" but it is not providing you with the service you were promised when you purchased it.
Anytime Amazon decides to delete a users account, they should have to offer a full, unconditional refund on the Kindle.
Seems someone at Google didn't fully realize that their low fanfare and subtle product roll out system wouldn't translate well to consumer electronics.
I was very excited to hear about Android in a Wired article last year and I was pleased to see it's just around the corner.
But in my opinion the launch was terrible. There was little coverage in mainstream media, I didn't see any commercials or marketing of any kind. They should have waited till they had more carriers on board, more cell phone / electronics manufacturers on board and launched with a huge marketing campaign. I would argue that Google has a more marketable IP than Apple does (almost everyone uses something Google related and most people have a generally positive view on Google), and if Android was launched properly it would have easily gone head to head with the iPhone (particularily if it wasn't rushed out and maintained all initially stated functionality).
You can however, complain about the big wall of text. I guess a forum designed by tech nerds for tech nerds can't figure out how to automatically put in line breaks when I press enter.
It's incredible how long the line of people who want to post "lol zomg newbsauce teh neighbour doesn't payz extra if you stealz their internets" is.
There was a point the poster was trying to make, but clearly it is impossible for some to log on to the internet and not jump on every opportunity to point out a perceived error while missing the bigger picture.
That being said, I don't even agree with his bigger picture. If Google created a service that could be used by third party apps, it is their fault for leaving it open to the public. If they want it only accessible to their own third party apps, I'm sure they can come up with a creative way to do it.
This is clearly bad design or bad planning. They either never realized their service could be used as a third party gateway, or they didn't think their system could be overloaded. I'm not familiar with the service so I don't know which it is.
It's like the people who give away free samples of various food products at the grocery store sometimes. Yes, they are there to push their samples on people who may make a purchase, yes it sucks for them when a group of 5 teenagers show up and take multiple samples and don't buy a thing - but that is part of the cost associated with that particular marketing scheme.
Unless accessing their system via third party hardware is against the EULA, Google has nobody to blame.
They'll probably relaunch the service soon and start sending out contextual SMS ads to people using it. Before your urge to reply to this last sentence takes you over, it's a joke.
Calm down. Without even getting fancy or elaborate about blocking cookies, there are easy solutions.
Ever porn surfing dad knows how to delete their cookies, it's an easy to find feature in any browser and even Maxim routinely covers the basics on that.
Most new browsers have a "privacy" mode of sorts and I'm sure we'll see plenty of plugins come out (or existing ad block plugins get updated) to stop the tracking cookies.
Also, since Google doesn't do pornographic ads (last time I checked anyways), and doesn't allow their ads to be displayed on sites that have pornographic materials, your fetish for Hairy Hardcore Latinas Gone Loco will be a secret between you and your ISP.
Republicans always find a way to blame something on Democrats.
Democrats always find a way to blame something on Republicans.
Jews kill Arabs, Arabs kill Jews, people sue over patent infringement and lawyers are often assholes.
Oprah seems too busy talking about getting fat again (and acting like it's some kind of horrible fate worse than death) to really do much publicizing of anything else.
Tonight on Larry King live, he had 3 guests, Oprahs personal trainer, her spiritual adviser and some other guy, talk at length about GASP, OPRAH GETTING FAT.
What the hell is wrong with our world, I don't know where to begin anymore.
Displayed at its best.
Look, DRM does only one thing: stop people from purchasing digital media.
I bought a CD recently, not because I wanted to hear what was on it, but because I had already downloaded it and decided I want to support the artist because it was good. Most PC games I ever purchase are ones I've actually downloaded and finished already, but I felt like I had to support the devs.
Sony and Apple will continue to fight a battle they cannot win.
How many stupid "smart" people there are on here. Reading skills ftl.
The API's have nothing to do with the base functionality, as has already been stated a dozen times.
No, but his point was if you made a browser called Foxfire it would be a harder case to prove infringement than say someone making a competing MP3 player called PODi.
The first uses two very common words, whereas the second uses an uncommon description for an MP3 player and couples it with both a unique capitalization scheme as well as the prefix "i" which Apple has spent a lot of money marketing. Even though the prefix is now a suffix and the name is backwards, Apple would have a much easier time trying to sue for that than Mozilla would trying to sue for Foxfire.
That the exact algorithms and rule sets the software would use to alter the camera angles isn't something the manufacturer is going to come out and publish.
If someone is spending the time to develop something of this nature I'm sure there will be a lot of customization available to suit different environments as well as some algorithms designed to detect a diversion.
Furthermore, two simple solutions I can think of right away are 1) encase the camera inside a container that allows it to swivel when necessary without having the outer container move. This would make it more difficult for people to know if their diversion work. Second, you could easily have them set up in pairs, having one static or scanning while the second one is responsive and uses the "ai".
Slashdot Mirror
While (ironically) Symantec's products aren't much better, I wouldn't rely on a free antivirus product either. Especially AVG *shiver*. Right now Kaspersky seems to be doing a very good job, but I find relying on one brand / product when it comes to utility software is a little foolish. Too often the product gets bloated or the developers stop investing as much into development or something better comes along. I pay for my antivirus and every year I do a little research before buying another subscription. Just as it is true that opensource and freeware softwares are not inherently worse or less powerful than software you have to pay for, it is also true that they are not inherently better or more powerful either, and I don't understand how this statement by a software company CEO is deemed newsworthy.
+mod points that I don't have. Layman opinion professional opinion
It's funny because Sony Online Entertainment seems to do pretty well.
Sony reminds me a lot of Apple. Though Apple clearly has a different view on the internet and has done a great job making money from online services, their corporate ideology seems to be very similar.
Both Sony and Apple love proprietary technology and trapping this customers into using their products and services. Like making it a massive challenge for a layman to use anything other than iTunes with their iPod, or making it very difficult to sync my iPod from one machine to the next. Or not allowing me to run Apple OS on whatever computer I wish, etc. As for Sony, everything from ATRAC to Sony Memory Sticks to the Cleo's just try to lock you into Sony. Not only that, but when I bought a brand new Sony MP3 phone last year, I realized that I can't play an MP3 without DRM on it! Over the years I've ripped a lot of my old CD's and now I had to use third party software to trick my MP3 phone into playing my MP3's because the phone was designed not to play something without DRM. That is unacceptable. I won't even get into the whole rootkit bs from a few years ago. There is a very large difference between creating a full range of services to try to capitalize on all your customers needs and from giving them limited functionality on products they purchase. I bought the fucking phone, I will play whatever the fuck I want to play on it, end of story.
To me, what this shows is a very scary Daddy Knows Best philosophy on the part of these companies and others like them. They believe that as a consumer, I am not to be trusted and that the products they sell me must be crippled, because I'm a deviant individual and will steal from them. The irony here is, those people who really want to use their products to their full potential simply just have to do a google search and see how it's done, all Sony is doing is making it a bigger pain in the ass for those people who are less tech savvy or who do not use pirated music or software.
Regardless, this is why I have stopped buying Sony or Apple products. We live in an age where 100 people walking around with anti Sony billboards won't do anything but if the same group stop buying Sony products, and educate their friends and family to do the same, it may eventually start showing in the bottom line.
I'm very optimistic about it all however because for every Sony or Apple out there, there are many other great technology companies that don't gimp their products. Eventually, enough people will catch on and these companies will understand that they must stop trying to fight the internet and start trying to find new ways to be competitive.
It's ironic that Mr. Lynton complains about consumers feeling entitled to getting free entertainment, because he seems to believe he is entitled to keep the same aging business model and not make any new or innovative changes to the services his company provides, and still make the same amount of money. Hardware electronic companies will eventually learn that the internet is here to stay and that there is no real way to fight it. What they must do is stay ahead of the technology and offer new and unique products and services to their consumers. Apple did and is doing a great job with iTunes, and if they didn't lock me into the software they way they do I would still be buying from them. Sony needs to wake up, hire a CEO who actually get's it, and completely reposition itself.
How is this news? Consoles were built on exclusive content, all gamers know that. You can't play Sonic on SNES, you can't play Mario on Sega Genesis, etc.
You're post is vary clever, I see what you did their.
zomg people have already said use an external monitor, learn to read noob.
Oh what's that? This has already been suggested six hundred and seventy four times, basically at a frequency of every 5th post?
Oh.
Well I don't care I'm posting it anyways, what good is the internet if I can't chime in about something?
The new WIRED told me the internet is full of funny people... I should have known better than to doubt wired. Oh and +1 mod funny.
It's not that bad, I mean we get American TV channels.
And I didn't mean to post that anonymously.
This story is CLEARLY false because I've been told by various marketting materials that Macs do NOT get viruses and are way too young-and-hip-and-sexy to be involved in something like a bot-whatchamacallit DOS attack thing. BRB going to fire up my iTunes on my iMac and plug in my iPod so I can transfer some songs I downloaded on my iPhone.
When you're buying a Kindle, you're purchasing a device that: 1) *Insert all technical features of Kindle* 2) Allows you to easily purchase publications and subscriptions from Amazons website. By removing his account, they have effectively broken his Kindle by removing functionality that is part of the original specification. It's like buying an XM Radio receiver and having your account deleted. Yes, the receiver still "works" but it is not providing you with the service you were promised when you purchased it. Anytime Amazon decides to delete a users account, they should have to offer a full, unconditional refund on the Kindle.
I still think it's incredible that there is no Google toolbar for Chrome.
Seems someone at Google didn't fully realize that their low fanfare and subtle product roll out system wouldn't translate well to consumer electronics. I was very excited to hear about Android in a Wired article last year and I was pleased to see it's just around the corner. But in my opinion the launch was terrible. There was little coverage in mainstream media, I didn't see any commercials or marketing of any kind. They should have waited till they had more carriers on board, more cell phone / electronics manufacturers on board and launched with a huge marketing campaign. I would argue that Google has a more marketable IP than Apple does (almost everyone uses something Google related and most people have a generally positive view on Google), and if Android was launched properly it would have easily gone head to head with the iPhone (particularily if it wasn't rushed out and maintained all initially stated functionality).
You can however, complain about the big wall of text. I guess a forum designed by tech nerds for tech nerds can't figure out how to automatically put in line breaks when I press enter.
So here are
couple of
br's to make up for
the lack of them in
my giant wall of text
It's incredible how long the line of people who want to post "lol zomg newbsauce teh neighbour doesn't payz extra if you stealz their internets" is. There was a point the poster was trying to make, but clearly it is impossible for some to log on to the internet and not jump on every opportunity to point out a perceived error while missing the bigger picture. That being said, I don't even agree with his bigger picture. If Google created a service that could be used by third party apps, it is their fault for leaving it open to the public. If they want it only accessible to their own third party apps, I'm sure they can come up with a creative way to do it. This is clearly bad design or bad planning. They either never realized their service could be used as a third party gateway, or they didn't think their system could be overloaded. I'm not familiar with the service so I don't know which it is. It's like the people who give away free samples of various food products at the grocery store sometimes. Yes, they are there to push their samples on people who may make a purchase, yes it sucks for them when a group of 5 teenagers show up and take multiple samples and don't buy a thing - but that is part of the cost associated with that particular marketing scheme. Unless accessing their system via third party hardware is against the EULA, Google has nobody to blame. They'll probably relaunch the service soon and start sending out contextual SMS ads to people using it. Before your urge to reply to this last sentence takes you over, it's a joke.
Calm down. Without even getting fancy or elaborate about blocking cookies, there are easy solutions. Ever porn surfing dad knows how to delete their cookies, it's an easy to find feature in any browser and even Maxim routinely covers the basics on that. Most new browsers have a "privacy" mode of sorts and I'm sure we'll see plenty of plugins come out (or existing ad block plugins get updated) to stop the tracking cookies. Also, since Google doesn't do pornographic ads (last time I checked anyways), and doesn't allow their ads to be displayed on sites that have pornographic materials, your fetish for Hairy Hardcore Latinas Gone Loco will be a secret between you and your ISP.
Republicans always find a way to blame something on Democrats. Democrats always find a way to blame something on Republicans. Jews kill Arabs, Arabs kill Jews, people sue over patent infringement and lawyers are often assholes. Oprah seems too busy talking about getting fat again (and acting like it's some kind of horrible fate worse than death) to really do much publicizing of anything else. Tonight on Larry King live, he had 3 guests, Oprahs personal trainer, her spiritual adviser and some other guy, talk at length about GASP, OPRAH GETTING FAT. What the hell is wrong with our world, I don't know where to begin anymore.
Displayed at its best. Look, DRM does only one thing: stop people from purchasing digital media. I bought a CD recently, not because I wanted to hear what was on it, but because I had already downloaded it and decided I want to support the artist because it was good. Most PC games I ever purchase are ones I've actually downloaded and finished already, but I felt like I had to support the devs. Sony and Apple will continue to fight a battle they cannot win.
"Some developers are using Macs. However, some are not." Silly.
Lol I guess you found some of whatever Bill Gates was smoking.
How many stupid "smart" people there are on here. Reading skills ftl. The API's have nothing to do with the base functionality, as has already been stated a dozen times.
No, but his point was if you made a browser called Foxfire it would be a harder case to prove infringement than say someone making a competing MP3 player called PODi. The first uses two very common words, whereas the second uses an uncommon description for an MP3 player and couples it with both a unique capitalization scheme as well as the prefix "i" which Apple has spent a lot of money marketing. Even though the prefix is now a suffix and the name is backwards, Apple would have a much easier time trying to sue for that than Mozilla would trying to sue for Foxfire.
That the exact algorithms and rule sets the software would use to alter the camera angles isn't something the manufacturer is going to come out and publish. If someone is spending the time to develop something of this nature I'm sure there will be a lot of customization available to suit different environments as well as some algorithms designed to detect a diversion. Furthermore, two simple solutions I can think of right away are 1) encase the camera inside a container that allows it to swivel when necessary without having the outer container move. This would make it more difficult for people to know if their diversion work. Second, you could easily have them set up in pairs, having one static or scanning while the second one is responsive and uses the "ai".