The Wii was succesful not because of the technology, but because they managed to draw in a huge untapped market, the non-gamer.
A friend of mine in the game industry had always talked about the next big video game crash. With the 'gamer' market being the primary one it started to become increasingly expensive to create games and consoles. Gamers kept demanding better and better graphics and more powerful systems. Those who couldn't afford the millions to create such a game were left behind and those that could were becoming increasingly scared to try new things. With such a large cost:market ratio it was safer to release sequels or add-ons to already proven successes. Eventually the gamer crowd was destined to demand more than what was profitable. The videogame industry would have two choices, either reduce the cost of producing titles or increase the market.
Nintendo did both. (Although I would think it would be tough to do either one individually). They turned a broken business model into a smart and profitable one. The wiimote had little to do with it. It was merely just a tool to reach out to that huge untapped market.
The problem with biking to work is that depending on what kind of shape you're in you might end up getting there sweaty, smelly and exhausted. And who really wants to put themselves through that first thing in the morning? The advantage of just doing it on the way home is that you can take your time and can take a shower and/or crash when you get in the door.
I've recently bought a folding bicycle for the sole purpose of doing just that. I start next week.
Several months ago when the Canadian dollar was at par with the American dollar Canadians started looking at the things they were buying and realizing (that for certain items) that they were paying way too much compared to their friends to the south.
The two big things on the list were Magazines and books. Even when you took the old Canadian dollar value into account, it still didn't add up to the amount we Canadians were being charged. (I had even seen Canadian written books, published and produced in Canada being sold for 40% more than the listed American price).
So, naturally, Canadians started getting pissed off and demanding that retailers sell the item to them at the listed US price. Many retailers were happy to oblige.
Publishers, on the other hand, weren't too fond of the events that were transpiring. Within a few months they had started replacing the books and magazines on the shelves with ones with adjusted pricing.
And by adjusted pricing, I mean, books and magazines with the American pricing removed so Canadian consumers wouldn't be able to see the difference in price.
On the other hand, sales of PC games at brick-and-mortar stores are down--way down, in fact. One week after announcing a recession-bucking $21.3 billion in non-PC game industry sales, the NPD Group revealed that US PC software sales had plummeted 23 percent to $701.1 million dollars at retail. The drop to 29.1 million units was pronounced, given the trend of the previous several years: In 2007, the figure was $911 million, down $59 million from 2006's $970 million haul, which was itself a 2 percent increase from the year prior. Thanks in large part to WOW's launch, US PC game sales hit an all-time high of $1.1 billion in 2004.
Granted, because of the increase in downloadable content using services like Steam, these numbers may not tell the whole story, but they aren't something you can ignore. The industry as a whole is growing rapidly (the sales in console games reflect that). Are services like Steam picking up enough slack to compensate for poor sales in retail locations? I don't know. All I do know is that retail stores have already started jumping ship. I've been to Walmarts that are no longer selling PC games (aside from the discount/learn French/math tutor style software). And while Best Buy and Futureshop still seem to carry a decent selection, stores with smaller footprints, like EB Games have reduced their stock to miniscule levels in favour of the console game. (Many EB Games seem to have uniformly reduced their stock to a single, half-height, 4 foot shelf so cramped that mega titles like Half Life 2 and World of Warcraft have to be merchandised sideways to fit in the small space.)
Maybe it's just me, but it also seems that videogaming has been moving increasingly towards consoles. One less thing you need an increasingly powerful computer for.
Since nearly all of these services only stream to the USA that's kind of expected.
If they were someday to become international targeting ads by using IP geolocation is pretty easy.. so it's a non-issue.
Most of those services stream to the USA -and- Canada.
We get CBS, ABC, NBC, Fox and TBS here in Canada but we're not allowed to watch those networks online. Some Canadian stations have great online viewers (such as CTV), however their content is limited as a good half of their content is American programming which they aren't allowed to air.
If what you listed were the only things important to you, it doesn't make sense that you'd shell out the extra money for an iPhone when many other phones meet that criteria or exceed it.
If media functions were not important to you, you'd most definitely pick something smaller, less fragile and cheaper.
"But then there is this group-think thing where people will convince themselves that they don't actually need whatever is lacking, and that they absolutely need whatever is there." -Blackcreek, someplace higher up the page.
Relatives of mine live along the Canadian-US border in Eastern Ontario (Thousand Islands reigion). If you stand in their kitchen your phone switches to an American tower. If you stand in their living room you get a Canadian tower. The signal 'border' seems to be fairly well defined and thankfully is very predictable. When I visit, the first thing I do is take my cellphone out of my pocket and leave it on the 'Canadian' side. If I get a call I know that if I walk past the couch for more than 30 seconds or so it will switch over.
I'm not even just referring to emails and text messages. You can't even answer a phone call on an iphone with gloves on. The way their touch system works it only picks up your touch when your bare skin touches the surface. So normally accessible buttons like Send and End actually become impossible to press without first taking your gloves off. (Or buying an expensive pair of ridiculous looking iphone gloves. Example)
Blind and visually impaired people are a small fraction of the population. There is a much larger market being neglected with many touch screen systems.
People who don't live in sunny California who have to wear gloves for part of the year. It's actually been the deciding factor around our Toronto office when coworkers have been picking their new smart phone. Most have been opting for non-touch screen phones, or the Blackberry Storm. The inability to use the iPhone without hassle while you're on the go has ruined its chances of entering the business market.
I agree with most of those, but I'd like to add one that is somewhat related to some of the above points:
8. When a game that forces me to watch 5 minutes of various logos and subjects me to lengthy loading screens every level is unlikely to be played much by me. A game that disallows me to alt+tab out of it (without being subjected to more loading screens or worse still, potential game and computer crashing).
It always surprises me how much many designers miss these details. Take GTA IV for example. If you want to play multiplayer you have to first log onto games for windows live, start up the single player mode (and all the loading that comes with it), and use an unintuitive menu to access multiplayer options(is being able to point and click too much to fucking ask?) Then you have to use a broken searching system to find maybe 2 or 3 online games (If anyone knows why their game searching system is so messed up, I'd be curious to know why). Once you join up you're subjected to more loading screens and plopped into the game. If you alt+tab out of the multiplayer game, even if for a few seconds, you get disconnected. If you want to quit the game entirely while playing multiplayer you have to first go back to single player mode (and be subjected to more loading screens) before it will let you exit via the menu.
A game can be absolutely incredible, but sometimes I don't have the time to invest an hour or two into a video game. If I only have 15 minutes I don't want to spend half of that time staring at goddamn menus, loading screens, and videocard and publisher logos
From the vegansociety.com:
If for any reason you choose not to use fortified foods or supplements you should recognise that you are carrying out a dangerous experiment - one that many have tried before with consistently low levels of success. If you are an adult who is neither breast-feeding an infant, pregnant nor seeking to become pregnant, and wish to test a potential B12 source that has not already been shown to be inadequate, then this can be a reasonable course of action with appropriate precautions. For your own protection, you should arrange to have your B12 status checked annually. If homocysteine or MMA is even modestly elevated then you are endangering your health if you persist.
Even a site called the Vegan Society warns against attempting to go vegan without using supplements. So by all means, feel free to take handfuls of pills daily in addition to the food you eat. Or I hear there is a particular type of yeast that you can eat to get proper B12.
Then you have just have to worry about protein, omega 3 fatty acids, iron, calcium, Iodine, Zinc and who knows what else.
To clarify my earlier comment. Vegetarians and omnivoires both have the ability to be equally healthy. The difference is that it is much more difficult for a vegetarian to balance the food they eat and still get the same results. Certain compounds essential to your health are few and far between in veggies and are ineffective in supplement form.
"SCIENTISTS have discovered that going veggie could be bad for your brain - with those on a meat-free diet six times more likely to suffer brain shrinkage.
Vegans and vegetarians â" such as Heather Mills â" are the most likely to be deficient because the best sources of the vitamin are meat, particularly liver, milk and fish.
Vitamin B12 deficiency can also cause anaemia and inflammation of the nervous system. "
Again, I stress that these vegetarians are capable of getting enough B12, but it's more difficult for them to find adequate sources. I guess it just comes down to an effort vs. overall health ratio. It's fairly easy for an ominvoire to simply reduce their meat intake and eat more vegetables and be equally healthy as a vegan who has to constantly and carefully balance their diet in order to ensure they're getting enough protein or B12 or other essential compounds.
This is based on today's knowledge of what is good and bad for us of course. Every 10 years or so there tends to be new discoveries as to what is required to stay healthy. It was only as recent as 2004 when Omega-3 fatty acids (contained in fish) were pretty conclusively shown to be beneficial (and essential) for your health. Vegans, of course adapt and start including more flaxseed oil into their diet (which they were unlikely to be consuming so readily before the discovery). In 5 or 10 years they'll discover something else which may or may not come from an animal source. I'm sure vegans will yet again adapt and adjust their diet again accordingly. But until then they'll of course be potentially missing the 'essential' compound they didn't realize they needed.
Vegans will point to 'statistics' that vegetarians and vegans are healthier than the average person.
You are the example of why their 'statistics' are misleading and biased. Most people don't give a shit about what they eat. So how is comparing that group of people to vegetarians/vegans (who put at least a little thought into their diet) fair? They're not unhealthy because they eat meat, they are unhealthy because they don't give a shit.
CastrTroy is the example of the right thing to do. Studies that are more in depth than the ones trying to promote their agenda have all shown that eating some meat (as part of a balanced diet) is healthier than eating no meat.
I'm not the I.T. guy, I don't know the specifics. I guess they could also be Mac Pros. They look identical to me. Half of the office use MacPros/G5s running software like Illustrator, Photoshop, 3DS Max and After Effects. Most of the rest use macs (iMac, MacBook,Mac Mini) for software that works on both Mac and PC. One department runs Solidworks on Macs booting into windows and one department (mine) use PCs (Which is a good thing, since I obviously know shit-all about Macs)
I'm afraid we haven't figured out a workaround for that problem, aside from leaving the computer turned on at all times. (And yes, that's the same problem we have).
I'm sure it would run fine actually. The problem are the security measures involved. Licenses for the CAD program are very expensive and the software developer wants to make sure that people don't pay for one license and use it on 10 computers. So, we have a nifty little 'key' that plugs into the parallel port in the back of the PC. Yeah, its a very antiquated system, but this is the main reason why we don't use macs like the rest of the office.
Ditto. What kind of company would keep buying Mac laptops for employees when it knew that those employees would need to buy an additional Windows license and install Bootcamp so that they could boot into Windows all the time? It's ludicrous just on the face of it.
Because it makes us more money. We do printing in-house using technologies that only a handful of people have, so they like to take people on tours of the facility. People think with their eyes. You can give them literature and tell them all about your fancy machines and it has nowhere near the same affect as when they see it in person. Same goes with the studio. When a potential client sees workstations outfitted with G5s they know you mean business. Especially since many of our clients are other design firms who are convinced you can only do design work on a mac.
Now, lets be fair, half of the departments are better off with a mac than they are with a pc. The guys that do 3d rendering and video editing for example. The illustrators are often dealing with client artwork so are also forced to be using macs due to compatibility issues (you'd be surprised how many fonts don't even exist on PC). Not to mention Photoshop and Illustrator run marginally better on macs.
I'm not sure. To be fair, there are a few of us that are using Dell monitors because of the problems with the mac displays. One guy with a maxed-out Dell XPS didn't have any problems, but the rest of us did. It seemed to be more of a compatibility issue with the graphics card than problems with windows.
I work for a marketing company and I can vouch that macs are used about 99% of the time in this business. Even the guys that require windows for all of their programs use bootcamp. The sales reps, coordinators,etc (while unnecessary) all use macs/macbooks.
I work in the only department that uses PCs (the program we use doesn't run well under bootcamp). Our towers get hidden under the desk and we're outfitted with unnecessarily expensive mac branded monitors. (Which of course aren't PC Plug and Play and require daily fucking arounds with to make work on bootup)
It really has little to do with performance or compatibility issues. It has to do with image. When clients see your design studio you don't want them to see cubicles and generic pcs and off-white walls. You want the workspace to reflect the creativity and design in your work, even if is impractical.
If you don't sign up for the list, you end up in much smaller pool of available numbers for legal telemarketing companies to pull from. Which of course means more calls for fewer people.
If you do sign up for the list, stuff like this happens.
To take that analogy further, this car of yours would have an autodrive feature that drives itself back to the dealership to be fixed in the event a recall is ordered. You of course intentionally deactivated this default safety feature.
Slashdot Mirror
The Wii was succesful not because of the technology, but because they managed to draw in a huge untapped market, the non-gamer.
A friend of mine in the game industry had always talked about the next big video game crash. With the 'gamer' market being the primary one it started to become increasingly expensive to create games and consoles. Gamers kept demanding better and better graphics and more powerful systems. Those who couldn't afford the millions to create such a game were left behind and those that could were becoming increasingly scared to try new things. With such a large cost:market ratio it was safer to release sequels or add-ons to already proven successes. Eventually the gamer crowd was destined to demand more than what was profitable. The videogame industry would have two choices, either reduce the cost of producing titles or increase the market.
Nintendo did both. (Although I would think it would be tough to do either one individually). They turned a broken business model into a smart and profitable one. The wiimote had little to do with it. It was merely just a tool to reach out to that huge untapped market.
Taking the bike on the bus with him?
The problem with biking to work is that depending on what kind of shape you're in you might end up getting there sweaty, smelly and exhausted. And who really wants to put themselves through that first thing in the morning? The advantage of just doing it on the way home is that you can take your time and can take a shower and/or crash when you get in the door.
I've recently bought a folding bicycle for the sole purpose of doing just that. I start next week.
Several months ago when the Canadian dollar was at par with the American dollar Canadians started looking at the things they were buying and realizing (that for certain items) that they were paying way too much compared to their friends to the south.
The two big things on the list were Magazines and books. Even when you took the old Canadian dollar value into account, it still didn't add up to the amount we Canadians were being charged. (I had even seen Canadian written books, published and produced in Canada being sold for 40% more than the listed American price).
So, naturally, Canadians started getting pissed off and demanding that retailers sell the item to them at the listed US price. Many retailers were happy to oblige.
Publishers, on the other hand, weren't too fond of the events that were transpiring. Within a few months they had started replacing the books and magazines on the shelves with ones with adjusted pricing.
And by adjusted pricing, I mean, books and magazines with the American pricing removed so Canadian consumers wouldn't be able to see the difference in price.
On the other hand, sales of PC games at brick-and-mortar stores are down--way down, in fact. One week after announcing a recession-bucking $21.3 billion in non-PC game industry sales, the NPD Group revealed that US PC software sales had plummeted 23 percent to $701.1 million dollars at retail. The drop to 29.1 million units was pronounced, given the trend of the previous several years: In 2007, the figure was $911 million, down $59 million from 2006's $970 million haul, which was itself a 2 percent increase from the year prior. Thanks in large part to WOW's launch, US PC game sales hit an all-time high of $1.1 billion in 2004.
Granted, because of the increase in downloadable content using services like Steam, these numbers may not tell the whole story, but they aren't something you can ignore. The industry as a whole is growing rapidly (the sales in console games reflect that). Are services like Steam picking up enough slack to compensate for poor sales in retail locations? I don't know. All I do know is that retail stores have already started jumping ship. I've been to Walmarts that are no longer selling PC games (aside from the discount/learn French/math tutor style software). And while Best Buy and Futureshop still seem to carry a decent selection, stores with smaller footprints, like EB Games have reduced their stock to miniscule levels in favour of the console game. (Many EB Games seem to have uniformly reduced their stock to a single, half-height, 4 foot shelf so cramped that mega titles like Half Life 2 and World of Warcraft have to be merchandised sideways to fit in the small space.)
Maybe it's just me, but it also seems that videogaming has been moving increasingly towards consoles. One less thing you need an increasingly powerful computer for.
Since nearly all of these services only stream to the USA that's kind of expected.
If they were someday to become international targeting ads by using IP geolocation is pretty easy.. so it's a non-issue.
Most of those services stream to the USA -and- Canada.
We get CBS, ABC, NBC, Fox and TBS here in Canada but we're not allowed to watch those networks online. Some Canadian stations have great online viewers (such as CTV), however their content is limited as a good half of their content is American programming which they aren't allowed to air.
Just replying to undo selecting the wrong moderation drop down option.
If what you listed were the only things important to you, it doesn't make sense that you'd shell out the extra money for an iPhone when many other phones meet that criteria or exceed it.
If media functions were not important to you, you'd most definitely pick something smaller, less fragile and cheaper.
"But then there is this group-think thing where people will convince themselves that they don't actually need whatever is lacking, and that they absolutely need whatever is there."
-Blackcreek, someplace higher up the page.
Relatives of mine live along the Canadian-US border in Eastern Ontario (Thousand Islands reigion). If you stand in their kitchen your phone switches to an American tower. If you stand in their living room you get a Canadian tower. The signal 'border' seems to be fairly well defined and thankfully is very predictable. When I visit, the first thing I do is take my cellphone out of my pocket and leave it on the 'Canadian' side. If I get a call I know that if I walk past the couch for more than 30 seconds or so it will switch over.
I'm not even just referring to emails and text messages. You can't even answer a phone call on an iphone with gloves on. The way their touch system works it only picks up your touch when your bare skin touches the surface. So normally accessible buttons like Send and End actually become impossible to press without first taking your gloves off. (Or buying an expensive pair of ridiculous looking iphone gloves. Example)
Blind and visually impaired people are a small fraction of the population. There is a much larger market being neglected with many touch screen systems.
People who don't live in sunny California who have to wear gloves for part of the year. It's actually been the deciding factor around our Toronto office when coworkers have been picking their new smart phone. Most have been opting for non-touch screen phones, or the Blackberry Storm. The inability to use the iPhone without hassle while you're on the go has ruined its chances of entering the business market.
I agree with most of those, but I'd like to add one that is somewhat related to some of the above points:
8. When a game that forces me to watch 5 minutes of various logos and subjects me to lengthy loading screens every level is unlikely to be played much by me. A game that disallows me to alt+tab out of it (without being subjected to more loading screens or worse still, potential game and computer crashing).
It always surprises me how much many designers miss these details. Take GTA IV for example. If you want to play multiplayer you have to first log onto games for windows live, start up the single player mode (and all the loading that comes with it), and use an unintuitive menu to access multiplayer options(is being able to point and click too much to fucking ask?) Then you have to use a broken searching system to find maybe 2 or 3 online games (If anyone knows why their game searching system is so messed up, I'd be curious to know why). Once you join up you're subjected to more loading screens and plopped into the game. If you alt+tab out of the multiplayer game, even if for a few seconds, you get disconnected. If you want to quit the game entirely while playing multiplayer you have to first go back to single player mode (and be subjected to more loading screens) before it will let you exit via the menu.
A game can be absolutely incredible, but sometimes I don't have the time to invest an hour or two into a video game. If I only have 15 minutes I don't want to spend half of that time staring at goddamn menus, loading screens, and videocard and publisher logos
From the vegansociety.com: If for any reason you choose not to use fortified foods or supplements you should recognise that you are carrying out a dangerous experiment - one that many have tried before with consistently low levels of success. If you are an adult who is neither breast-feeding an infant, pregnant nor seeking to become pregnant, and wish to test a potential B12 source that has not already been shown to be inadequate, then this can be a reasonable course of action with appropriate precautions. For your own protection, you should arrange to have your B12 status checked annually. If homocysteine or MMA is even modestly elevated then you are endangering your health if you persist.
Even a site called the Vegan Society warns against attempting to go vegan without using supplements. So by all means, feel free to take handfuls of pills daily in addition to the food you eat. Or I hear there is a particular type of yeast that you can eat to get proper B12.
Then you have just have to worry about protein, omega 3 fatty acids, iron, calcium, Iodine, Zinc and who knows what else.
To clarify my earlier comment. Vegetarians and omnivoires both have the ability to be equally healthy. The difference is that it is much more difficult for a vegetarian to balance the food they eat and still get the same results. Certain compounds essential to your health are few and far between in veggies and are ineffective in supplement form.
http://www.news.com.au/
"SCIENTISTS have discovered that going veggie could be bad for your brain - with those on a meat-free diet six times more likely to suffer brain shrinkage. Vegans and vegetarians â" such as Heather Mills â" are the most likely to be deficient because the best sources of the vitamin are meat, particularly liver, milk and fish. Vitamin B12 deficiency can also cause anaemia and inflammation of the nervous system. "
Again, I stress that these vegetarians are capable of getting enough B12, but it's more difficult for them to find adequate sources. I guess it just comes down to an effort vs. overall health ratio. It's fairly easy for an ominvoire to simply reduce their meat intake and eat more vegetables and be equally healthy as a vegan who has to constantly and carefully balance their diet in order to ensure they're getting enough protein or B12 or other essential compounds.
This is based on today's knowledge of what is good and bad for us of course. Every 10 years or so there tends to be new discoveries as to what is required to stay healthy. It was only as recent as 2004 when Omega-3 fatty acids (contained in fish) were pretty conclusively shown to be beneficial (and essential) for your health. Vegans, of course adapt and start including more flaxseed oil into their diet (which they were unlikely to be consuming so readily before the discovery). In 5 or 10 years they'll discover something else which may or may not come from an animal source. I'm sure vegans will yet again adapt and adjust their diet again accordingly. But until then they'll of course be potentially missing the 'essential' compound they didn't realize they needed.
Vegans will point to 'statistics' that vegetarians and vegans are healthier than the average person.
You are the example of why their 'statistics' are misleading and biased. Most people don't give a shit about what they eat. So how is comparing that group of people to vegetarians/vegans (who put at least a little thought into their diet) fair? They're not unhealthy because they eat meat, they are unhealthy because they don't give a shit.
CastrTroy is the example of the right thing to do. Studies that are more in depth than the ones trying to promote their agenda have all shown that eating some meat (as part of a balanced diet) is healthier than eating no meat.
All this talk about soft drinks has me craving a nice, ice-cold Sprunk.
I'm not the I.T. guy, I don't know the specifics. I guess they could also be Mac Pros. They look identical to me. Half of the office use MacPros/G5s running software like Illustrator, Photoshop, 3DS Max and After Effects. Most of the rest use macs (iMac, MacBook,Mac Mini) for software that works on both Mac and PC. One department runs Solidworks on Macs booting into windows and one department (mine) use PCs (Which is a good thing, since I obviously know shit-all about Macs)
I'm afraid we haven't figured out a workaround for that problem, aside from leaving the computer turned on at all times. (And yes, that's the same problem we have).
I'm sure it would run fine actually. The problem are the security measures involved. Licenses for the CAD program are very expensive and the software developer wants to make sure that people don't pay for one license and use it on 10 computers. So, we have a nifty little 'key' that plugs into the parallel port in the back of the PC. Yeah, its a very antiquated system, but this is the main reason why we don't use macs like the rest of the office.
Ditto. What kind of company would keep buying Mac laptops for employees when it knew that those employees would need to buy an additional Windows license and install Bootcamp so that they could boot into Windows all the time? It's ludicrous just on the face of it.
Because it makes us more money. We do printing in-house using technologies that only a handful of people have, so they like to take people on tours of the facility. People think with their eyes. You can give them literature and tell them all about your fancy machines and it has nowhere near the same affect as when they see it in person. Same goes with the studio. When a potential client sees workstations outfitted with G5s they know you mean business. Especially since many of our clients are other design firms who are convinced you can only do design work on a mac.
Now, lets be fair, half of the departments are better off with a mac than they are with a pc. The guys that do 3d rendering and video editing for example. The illustrators are often dealing with client artwork so are also forced to be using macs due to compatibility issues (you'd be surprised how many fonts don't even exist on PC). Not to mention Photoshop and Illustrator run marginally better on macs.
I'm not sure. To be fair, there are a few of us that are using Dell monitors because of the problems with the mac displays. One guy with a maxed-out Dell XPS didn't have any problems, but the rest of us did. It seemed to be more of a compatibility issue with the graphics card than problems with windows.
I work for a marketing company and I can vouch that macs are used about 99% of the time in this business. Even the guys that require windows for all of their programs use bootcamp. The sales reps, coordinators,etc (while unnecessary) all use macs/macbooks.
I work in the only department that uses PCs (the program we use doesn't run well under bootcamp). Our towers get hidden under the desk and we're outfitted with unnecessarily expensive mac branded monitors. (Which of course aren't PC Plug and Play and require daily fucking arounds with to make work on bootup)
It really has little to do with performance or compatibility issues. It has to do with image. When clients see your design studio you don't want them to see cubicles and generic pcs and off-white walls. You want the workspace to reflect the creativity and design in your work, even if is impractical.
If you don't sign up for the list, you end up in much smaller pool of available numbers for legal telemarketing companies to pull from. Which of course means more calls for fewer people.
If you do sign up for the list, stuff like this happens.
A handgun is designed to be used for two things.
1) Shooting People
2) Making People think you're going to shoot them
Please, enlighten me how else a handgun can be used as a tool.
To take that analogy further, this car of yours would have an autodrive feature that drives itself back to the dealership to be fixed in the event a recall is ordered. You of course intentionally deactivated this default safety feature.