What do you do when your authoritarian boss actually dictates a lack of order? When the word from on high is "wing it"?
I'm actually dealing with a boss who doesn't appear to see any value in any sort of up-front design. The guy mocks stuff up in Excel and then says "just look on the internet... I'm sure someone's already written code to do this." NO THEY HAVEN'T!!!
Really valuable information will continue to be duplicated - if it's useful to someone, they'll make an effort to maintain it (reburning CD-Rs, replacing their flash drive, whatever). However, not being able to access that information would certainly decrease its value.
To be fair, I've read far shittier. It's not that Brown's a terrible writer; just that he's pretty much written the same two books twice. Let me know when he gets up to releasing the same book seven or eight times, Tom Clancy-style.
Which is exactly the attitude the OP was complaining about.
Look, the fact of the matter is, Microsoft responds to its users, particularly the OEMs, IT decision-makers, and yes, even the enthusiasts. Why? Because it has to, or the money stops flowing. Say what you will about MS, at least they have an incentive to make their users happy.
On the other hand, if you want to persuade someone to join your camp, you don't make it difficult for them to evaluate your offering. I'm not saying that the video should have been in WMV format (why alienate your core audience?) but the attitude of "this is how we do things; if you don't like it, go away" is NOT the way to win any converts.
The people who put those videos up probably weren't even thinking about these sorts of issues - they simply used whatever tool they had at hand. Perceptions, however, DO matter, and that appears to be the reasoning behind the OP.
Which is exactly the point of trusted computing. The content providers would be taking a huge risk by trusting each and every user. They can't trust a media player binary that wasn't compiled by a trusted licensee of theirs.
It sucks, but media companies are going to want to be able to alleviate their fear of unauthorized distribution before jumping into the digital content market. They have just as much a right to be afraid as you do.
And when it goes right? When you and a few friends get together, coordinate using voice, and utterly stomp the lamers until they tuck tail and run for someone else, anyone else, that won't humiliate them?
That's when the stupidest thing they ever did becomes an obvious necessity.
True, but how much energy does it take to grow the plants to convert into biofuel?
Other than that, I like the idea. It certainly replaces the importance of certain oil-rich regions with that of arable land, which is differently, and hopefully more evenly, distributed (sucks to be outside the temperate zone).
Agreed. If I were to spend most of my waking hours the way the first one goes, I'd be unemployed. I specifically go to work an hour early so my boss doesn't have to see me in that state, as he arrives just as my productivity is starting to ramp up.
And hey, it gets me out at 4 pm. You can't beat that.
"You may all hate the RIAA, but you have to admit that putting Kelly Clarkson's new single in your shared folder is different than putting your own jpg's on the web."
Yeah. When I put my own material up on the web for free, no harm is done. When someone distributes Kelly Clarkson, there's demonstrable harm to the recipient.
Well, if Apple had used x86-64 chips, one could just load Windows XP x64, which is a nice combination of XP and 2003. You'd lose the locked-down component, of course.
There's an easy fix to the problem of the blind-spot checker being used as a replacement - put the indicator on the pillar near the mirror. You're looking that way anyway at that point.
"I actually do have a copy of "Deus Ex 2" waiting for the release of Intel-based Macs."
For your own sake, I hope you didn't enjoy the first one. Because if you did, playing the second will be a physically and emotionally painful experience.
Is this actually the case, however? Is the average consumer really that fed up with MS? The average IT decision-maker? And if so, is it really altering their purchasing behavior?
A handful of people grumbling about MS is one thing. A full-fledged customer revolt is quite another.
Wow. So now I can have an Xbox as a HD-DVD player, a Playstation as a Blu-ray player, and still need my existing DVD-Audio+SACD player (my sympathy to those who bought in before unified players on that one). Mind you, I can't find much content for that multichannel audio player anyway, but I'd like to still be able to play the few discs I have.
I hate format wars. I'd wait this one out until a unified player as well, but I already have a 360, and I'll probably end up getting a PS3.
True, but there really wasn't a better solution to the problem back then. Nowadays, computers are designed to be operated more like appliances, and the soft power buttons on them fit into that paradigm. (They're also much more convenient - just tap the button and walk away.)
"How many people think Internet Explorer IS the internet?"
Which is precisely what makes it a good name. Someone in MS' marketing department earned their bonus that year. That's the holy grail of marketing: the customer identifies the entire concept with your brand. See Kleenex, Xerox, etc..
The downside of this is that when commoditization sets in, generic versions piggyback on your brand. See Kleenex, Xerox, etc..
"Contrary to a myth promoted by Microsoft and others, you simply can't use a computer without having to learn anything."
Maybe it's just a myth, but it's what the customers are expecting. Either suck it up and try to make them happy, or don't expect a lot of customers to be attracted to your product.
How so? You click the Start button to "start" doing anything, including shutting down the system. Certainly sounds more intuitive than sticking it behind a blue apple or a gray foot.
It's a combination of simple math and not-so-simple prediction. There's really 3 options:
1. Pull out of the EU. This will cost them a ton of revenue in Europe, though the OS can still be imported. They save 2.4M a day and keep their protocols closed.
2. Open the protocols. This will cost them the value of having closed protocols, the cost of compliance, and anything else the EU wants now that they know MS is... willing to negotiate. On the other hand, they keep their market (including all the marketing dollars they've spent building mindshare) and their 2.4M a day.
3. Stay in, pay the fine, and keep the protocols closed. This will cost them 2.4M a day, and REALLY piss off the EU.
So the questions are: is staying in Europe worth 2.4M a day? Is keeping the protocols closed worth the lesser of current and future revenue from Europe or 2.4M a day (or more, if other governments decide to sue as well)? If pulling out of the EU is the most beneficial option (I doubt it is), then it's not American arrogance - it's simple business sense.
There's one more caveat, of course - the nuclear option. If MS pulls out and customers simply import their MS software, the EU can levy heavy tariffs, or even declare MS' IP to be public domain. Either one of those is going to start an ugly international trade dispute.
Slashdot Mirror
Two words: Meese Commission.
That's what I'm afraid of.
What do you do when your authoritarian boss actually dictates a lack of order? When the word from on high is "wing it"?
I'm actually dealing with a boss who doesn't appear to see any value in any sort of up-front design. The guy mocks stuff up in Excel and then says "just look on the internet... I'm sure someone's already written code to do this." NO THEY HAVEN'T!!!
Really valuable information will continue to be duplicated - if it's useful to someone, they'll make an effort to maintain it (reburning CD-Rs, replacing their flash drive, whatever). However, not being able to access that information would certainly decrease its value.
Think of it as Darwinism for data.
I can't wait until my upstairs neighbor gets one of these.
There's already a device that can open doors with a single knock. It's called C4.
It spreads the channel across the back wall, making it more diffuse. Basically, it lets you use two direct speakers instead of a bipolar surround.
To be fair, I've read far shittier. It's not that Brown's a terrible writer; just that he's pretty much written the same two books twice. Let me know when he gets up to releasing the same book seven or eight times, Tom Clancy-style.
Which is exactly the attitude the OP was complaining about.
Look, the fact of the matter is, Microsoft responds to its users, particularly the OEMs, IT decision-makers, and yes, even the enthusiasts. Why? Because it has to, or the money stops flowing. Say what you will about MS, at least they have an incentive to make their users happy.
On the other hand, if you want to persuade someone to join your camp, you don't make it difficult for them to evaluate your offering. I'm not saying that the video should have been in WMV format (why alienate your core audience?) but the attitude of "this is how we do things; if you don't like it, go away" is NOT the way to win any converts.
The people who put those videos up probably weren't even thinking about these sorts of issues - they simply used whatever tool they had at hand. Perceptions, however, DO matter, and that appears to be the reasoning behind the OP.
Which is exactly the point of trusted computing. The content providers would be taking a huge risk by trusting each and every user. They can't trust a media player binary that wasn't compiled by a trusted licensee of theirs.
It sucks, but media companies are going to want to be able to alleviate their fear of unauthorized distribution before jumping into the digital content market. They have just as much a right to be afraid as you do.
Ummm... they're a RAM vendor. You might even have some of their chips in your PC (check the graphics card).
None. It's a corporate acquisition. If PostgreSQL were hurting Oracle's bottom line, would they be going on a shopping spree?
Note: my opinions are not necessarily those of my employer.
And when it goes right? When you and a few friends get together, coordinate using voice, and utterly stomp the lamers until they tuck tail and run for someone else, anyone else, that won't humiliate them?
That's when the stupidest thing they ever did becomes an obvious necessity.
True, but how much energy does it take to grow the plants to convert into biofuel?
Other than that, I like the idea. It certainly replaces the importance of certain oil-rich regions with that of arable land, which is differently, and hopefully more evenly, distributed (sucks to be outside the temperate zone).
Agreed. If I were to spend most of my waking hours the way the first one goes, I'd be unemployed. I specifically go to work an hour early so my boss doesn't have to see me in that state, as he arrives just as my productivity is starting to ramp up.
And hey, it gets me out at 4 pm. You can't beat that.
"You may all hate the RIAA, but you have to admit that putting Kelly Clarkson's new single in your shared folder is different than putting your own jpg's on the web."
Yeah. When I put my own material up on the web for free, no harm is done. When someone distributes Kelly Clarkson, there's demonstrable harm to the recipient.
Well, if Apple had used x86-64 chips, one could just load Windows XP x64, which is a nice combination of XP and 2003. You'd lose the locked-down component, of course.
There's an easy fix to the problem of the blind-spot checker being used as a replacement - put the indicator on the pillar near the mirror. You're looking that way anyway at that point.
"I actually do have a copy of "Deus Ex 2" waiting for the release of Intel-based Macs."
For your own sake, I hope you didn't enjoy the first one. Because if you did, playing the second will be a physically and emotionally painful experience.
Is this actually the case, however? Is the average consumer really that fed up with MS? The average IT decision-maker? And if so, is it really altering their purchasing behavior?
A handful of people grumbling about MS is one thing. A full-fledged customer revolt is quite another.
Wow. So now I can have an Xbox as a HD-DVD player, a Playstation as a Blu-ray player, and still need my existing DVD-Audio+SACD player (my sympathy to those who bought in before unified players on that one). Mind you, I can't find much content for that multichannel audio player anyway, but I'd like to still be able to play the few discs I have.
I hate format wars. I'd wait this one out until a unified player as well, but I already have a 360, and I'll probably end up getting a PS3.
True, but there really wasn't a better solution to the problem back then. Nowadays, computers are designed to be operated more like appliances, and the soft power buttons on them fit into that paradigm. (They're also much more convenient - just tap the button and walk away.)
"How many people think Internet Explorer IS the internet?"
Which is precisely what makes it a good name. Someone in MS' marketing department earned their bonus that year. That's the holy grail of marketing: the customer identifies the entire concept with your brand. See Kleenex, Xerox, etc..
The downside of this is that when commoditization sets in, generic versions piggyback on your brand. See Kleenex, Xerox, etc..
"Contrary to a myth promoted by Microsoft and others, you simply can't use a computer without having to learn anything."
Maybe it's just a myth, but it's what the customers are expecting. Either suck it up and try to make them happy, or don't expect a lot of customers to be attracted to your product.
How so? You click the Start button to "start" doing anything, including shutting down the system. Certainly sounds more intuitive than sticking it behind a blue apple or a gray foot.
It's a combination of simple math and not-so-simple prediction. There's really 3 options:
1. Pull out of the EU. This will cost them a ton of revenue in Europe, though the OS can still be imported. They save 2.4M a day and keep their protocols closed.
2. Open the protocols. This will cost them the value of having closed protocols, the cost of compliance, and anything else the EU wants now that they know MS is... willing to negotiate. On the other hand, they keep their market (including all the marketing dollars they've spent building mindshare) and their 2.4M a day.
3. Stay in, pay the fine, and keep the protocols closed. This will cost them 2.4M a day, and REALLY piss off the EU.
So the questions are: is staying in Europe worth 2.4M a day? Is keeping the protocols closed worth the lesser of current and future revenue from Europe or 2.4M a day (or more, if other governments decide to sue as well)? If pulling out of the EU is the most beneficial option (I doubt it is), then it's not American arrogance - it's simple business sense.
There's one more caveat, of course - the nuclear option. If MS pulls out and customers simply import their MS software, the EU can levy heavy tariffs, or even declare MS' IP to be public domain. Either one of those is going to start an ugly international trade dispute.