where else are they going to get microsoft windows, which they have to have in order to work and play? it's called a monopoly, and this is called abuse of monopoly powers. if there was a real choice in operating systems, they would never, ever, ever do this, because everyone they pestered would switch to a different vendor.
this is why a vertical microsoft breakup was necessary, with competing 'microsoft windows' companies. as long as they were not allowed to form a defacto-monopoly again by joining these 'alliances', competition would naturally keep these nasty practices very, very far from your doors.
this is also why the RIAA and the MPAA should be considered monopolies, because once the few big 'competitors' are in bed together, they may as well be one company.
naturally the neighbor is breaking the law for listening in (if by law we define the cable companies policy, which may as well be as they will fine you, etc).
but cable companies also hold the customer responsible with heavy fines for 'sharing' their cable knowingly (see my example of drilling holes between apartments to share cable: both parties would be in for some $$).
and watch out, because probably it will become your burden to prove that you did not know your neighbor was listening in on your cable, not on the cable companies to prove that you did know. this isn't 'real law' here, folks, it is the cable company (read: monopoly in most areas) who sets whatever arbitrary policy they choose.
Is this somehow different because it's wireless???
well, with coax, more than likely there isn't enough stray radiation from the coax to allow your neighbor to access your cable (of course we are all doing this anyway with splitters, etc, but that is beside the point).
with wireless, you are rebroadcasting your cable signal to your TV. the rebroadcast will probably be available to your neighbors, at least in apartment complexes.
ah, finally, free cable, without having even to drill a hole from closet to closet for the coax.
1. cable TV $0 (pirated)
2. car note $0 (stolen)
3. car insurance $0 (who needs it, and do you have ANY idea how HARD it is to insure a stolen car?)
4. regular phone $0 (don't need it, have a cell phone)
5. cell phone $20
6. tivo $0 (don't have one, don't need one, don't particularly want one)
7. broadband $0 (can't get it without a phone line or legal cable)
now despite the falsehoods in my list, point 7 is important. you can't get DSL without an actual regular phone line, and since i'm well covered by the verizon monopoly, no thank you, verizon, i'd even go without broadband rather than deal with you EVER again.
so i guess i'm waiting for some REAL broadband company (qwest fiber to your house, anyone?) to offer residential services, or for a local ISP to offer wireless broadband so i can enjoy it for a few months before they go bankrupt.
ps - the truth? i have bunny ears on my TV, a crappy used car which is overinsured in the hopes it catches fire spectacularly, DSL and a regular line from Verizon. only points 5 and 6 above are true:)
the utilities you mention are metered, which means charged for actual use of the service (watts and gallons become bytes). and this is, i think, the kind of plan which has to happen to save broadband providers from themselves. of course we, as (ab)users of the system like our unmetered, wanton ways, but how many gigs of porn and divx would you be downloading if it was costing you.
the best comparison i think could be to cell phones. you pay X for service, you have Y bytes per month, and if you pay extra you get unlimited nights and weekends. this is the kind of thing which can give the broadpand providers an actual business model to get the service out the door. then, like cell phones, they can offer special things to you based on a model like USENET, where they have the content locally, you are just saturating the pipe to the provider. you can pay Z per month to get unlimited access to local content.
but the 'logical' comparison is to a service like cable TV. you pay your X per month, and you can watch as often as you like, unmetered. unfortunately that model simply doesn't work for broadband, because that does not reflect the manner in which THEIR costs are incurred, which is by your downloading gigs of porn and divx from the internet at large, meaning they get to pay THEIR providers for that usage.
There's nothing better than an always-on, FAST cable modem:)
how about an always-on, LOW LATENCY DSL modem:) i visited my parents for xmas, their cable modem had decent download times but there was this feeling of 'lag' which i just can't stand. give me 256Kbps downloads and 40 msec ping time rather than 1Mbps downloads and 400 msec ping time ANY day. well, except the days i am the one downloading all the divx and porn...
i've watched a few interviews with lawrence lessig (stanford law professor) and have come away with mixed feelings. on the one hand, sometimes he seems to 'get it' as far as what open source and free software are about (the former about the business model, the latter about the freedom). on the other hand he seems (at least to me) to misrepresent the importance of napster at any opportunity (but then again, that is the only topic i've seen an interviewer ask him a question about).
all in all he actually does good things, and i like the thought of someone like him teaching at the best law school in the country. maybe the next generation of IP lawyers will know which side of the fence to stand on.
but then again, with stanford tuition being what it is, and the MPAA/RIAA paying what they do, don't count on it, i guess.
perhaps in your experience XP is as stable as linux, in my experience it most certainly has NOT. anyway... most of your arguments are very strange coming from this side of the fence.
"It's faster than linux with KDE; it runs numerous aps Linux can't support (EverQuest, DAoC, Tribes 2)."
different tools for the job. of COURSE people who want to play EverQuest, DAoC, and Tribes 2 are going to have a windows machine. those are all windows software titles (as an aside, DAoC is one of the great ones ever, IMHO).
but to reiterate, perhaps windows XP is as stable as linux in your experience. i am not alone to say that i have had the opposite experience. but i will say that by service pack 2 or 3, windows XP looks VERY promising, because it really makes a lot of things easier, such as dragging files to your CD drive in windows explorer, and clicking 'burn CD'. that is intuitive and good (of course it is also a rip-off of other operating systems, but hey, everyone should take the good ideas and go with them if they can). however as of right now, it runs some games SLOWER than windows ME (pool of radiance, for example, which as an aside really sucks). XP has a long way to go before i think about upgrading from windows 2000, because win2k does everything i want it to do, and doesn't crash on me like XP does (at work i have two identical systems, one running each OS. i invariably use the win2k machine because i don't want to keep losing work).
bet you thought i was going to say 'linux' at least once in this post. yup, the server is still running, 254 days uptime. different tools for different jobs, i would not try to have a windows box host the sourceforge server if i were you.
you don't HAVE to upgrade your linux box, either. but at least you have the OPTION of upgrading for FREE, instead of paying year after year if you want to upgrade.
as you said, you are happy with win98, more power to you. but many people are not happy with windows and have to shell out big bucks every couple years to upgrade.
yeah, i know, the post was flamebait. but hey, i'm a sucker for anything this obvious.
that sounds like the episode of ST:TNG when they find scotty and he is advising geordi of how to really become an awe-inspiring engineer. something along the lines of (heavily paraphrasing from distant memory):
scotty: why did ya tell the cap'n it would take 1 week?
geordi: because that is about how long i think it will take.
scotty: (sighing). i know, but ye tell the cap'n 2 weeks, and when you finish it in 1, they'll think yer a genius.
stacks of XBox consoles in the research trangle park area. no gamecubes left, though. and if you really want to think xbox graphics are good... well, go to blockbuster and rent one and halo, and rent a PS2 and one of the recent (2nd gen) releases, like metal gear solid 2, etc. have fun.
my main beef with baldur's gate is it was, in the end, an entirely too simplistic game. it was completely linear: go from point A to point B, killing monsters C, D, and E. there is no element of RP that i could find - you could say different things at different times, but none of them seemed to make any 'real' difference.
also, the difficulty level 'normal' was laughable. 'hard' is still very, very easy, but at least some of the bosses are a little more interesting (but still pushovers).
i'll agree that the water and the pushable boxes (and the powder kegs!) are pretty cool. they seem to have the engine pretty well down, but this version seems to be a game without an audience: too simple for older gamers, too bloody for younger gamers. but the engine leads me to want more:
1. more races
2. more classes
3. more player customization (names, size, color, etc)
4. ONLINE PLAY
5. more non-linear story elements
6. more puzzles/traps
but like i said, it is a great first offering on the console for Baldur's Gate. but i hate to disappoint, act I is by far the best act. however act ii has some really nicely rendered caves, and some monsters which hearken back to the days of pen and paper dnd (frost giants, displacer beasts!). i just hope they take the engine to its potential in the next version (ONLINE PLEASE!!).
i've played a lot of games, and gone 'wow' at some of the eye candy, but if you've played baldur's gate for PS2 you know that the coolest thing that has ever been coded for a game is the WATER for this game. you leave a wake behind you when you walk through it, you splash when you jump in, and ripples interact and reflect from the shore. maybe the physics aren't 'perfect' or whatever, but the realism of the water was enough to really 'immerse' myself into the game.
i actually did buy my tickets about a week and a half ago (dork alert). i'll have to wait in line again unless i want to sit in the back corners next to the speakers, or in the front row with my neck craning up to see the screen.
oh, and yes i am a geek (obviously), but self-respecting? that's pushing it.
how to decide? wait in line, get FF X, or wait in line, go to LOTR? both probably. i guess i should just go ahead and take the day off from work while i'm at it.
uh... the explanation is the oldest in the fantasy genre. it was his destiny. the ring came to him, the 'most unlikely of persons' or something like that. basically that is like asking, why could arthur draw the sword from the stone, or something like that. it's the oldest trick in the genre, or alternatively, the answer you give your kids if they keep asking 'why?' time and time again for each answer.
the HP books are basically like long scooby doo episodes. long bunch of walking around, then at the end there is a flurry of action and the enemy has his big plastic mask pulled off, screaming 'if it weren't for you kids...'
Slashdot Mirror
To quote tweety bird, "He don't know me wery well, do he?" ;-)
Only reply if you have a lower UID. I know you are lurking.
and those of us with 5-digit IDs are complaining that "back in my day we played MUDs, and doggonit, we liked it".
--
scaring off their customers
where else are they going to get microsoft windows, which they have to have in order to work and play? it's called a monopoly, and this is called abuse of monopoly powers. if there was a real choice in operating systems, they would never, ever, ever do this, because everyone they pestered would switch to a different vendor.
this is why a vertical microsoft breakup was necessary, with competing 'microsoft windows' companies. as long as they were not allowed to form a defacto-monopoly again by joining these 'alliances', competition would naturally keep these nasty practices very, very far from your doors.
this is also why the RIAA and the MPAA should be considered monopolies, because once the few big 'competitors' are in bed together, they may as well be one company.
-sam
i don't read EULAs because for the most part they are not enforceable, because as everyone knows, nobody reads EULAs.
-sam
the website www.x.org says: "Since its first commercial release in 1986, the X Window System has..."
so i would guess 1986 for X-Windows?
-sam
naturally the neighbor is breaking the law for listening in (if by law we define the cable companies policy, which may as well be as they will fine you, etc).
but cable companies also hold the customer responsible with heavy fines for 'sharing' their cable knowingly (see my example of drilling holes between apartments to share cable: both parties would be in for some $$).
and watch out, because probably it will become your burden to prove that you did not know your neighbor was listening in on your cable, not on the cable companies to prove that you did know. this isn't 'real law' here, folks, it is the cable company (read: monopoly in most areas) who sets whatever arbitrary policy they choose.
-sam
Is this somehow different because it's wireless???
well, with coax, more than likely there isn't enough stray radiation from the coax to allow your neighbor to access your cable (of course we are all doing this anyway with splitters, etc, but that is beside the point).
with wireless, you are rebroadcasting your cable signal to your TV. the rebroadcast will probably be available to your neighbors, at least in apartment complexes.
ah, finally, free cable, without having even to drill a hole from closet to closet for the coax.
-sam
let's see, as a typical US citizen:
:)
1. cable TV $0 (pirated)
2. car note $0 (stolen)
3. car insurance $0 (who needs it, and do you have ANY idea how HARD it is to insure a stolen car?)
4. regular phone $0 (don't need it, have a cell phone)
5. cell phone $20
6. tivo $0 (don't have one, don't need one, don't particularly want one)
7. broadband $0 (can't get it without a phone line or legal cable)
now despite the falsehoods in my list, point 7 is important. you can't get DSL without an actual regular phone line, and since i'm well covered by the verizon monopoly, no thank you, verizon, i'd even go without broadband rather than deal with you EVER again.
so i guess i'm waiting for some REAL broadband company (qwest fiber to your house, anyone?) to offer residential services, or for a local ISP to offer wireless broadband so i can enjoy it for a few months before they go bankrupt.
ps - the truth? i have bunny ears on my TV, a crappy used car which is overinsured in the hopes it catches fire spectacularly, DSL and a regular line from Verizon. only points 5 and 6 above are true
-sam
a utility like power and water
:)
:) i visited my parents for xmas, their cable modem had decent download times but there was this feeling of 'lag' which i just can't stand. give me 256Kbps downloads and 40 msec ping time rather than 1Mbps downloads and 400 msec ping time ANY day. well, except the days i am the one downloading all the divx and porn...
the utilities you mention are metered, which means charged for actual use of the service (watts and gallons become bytes). and this is, i think, the kind of plan which has to happen to save broadband providers from themselves. of course we, as (ab)users of the system like our unmetered, wanton ways, but how many gigs of porn and divx would you be downloading if it was costing you.
the best comparison i think could be to cell phones. you pay X for service, you have Y bytes per month, and if you pay extra you get unlimited nights and weekends. this is the kind of thing which can give the broadpand providers an actual business model to get the service out the door. then, like cell phones, they can offer special things to you based on a model like USENET, where they have the content locally, you are just saturating the pipe to the provider. you can pay Z per month to get unlimited access to local content.
but the 'logical' comparison is to a service like cable TV. you pay your X per month, and you can watch as often as you like, unmetered. unfortunately that model simply doesn't work for broadband, because that does not reflect the manner in which THEIR costs are incurred, which is by your downloading gigs of porn and divx from the internet at large, meaning they get to pay THEIR providers for that usage.
There's nothing better than an always-on, FAST cable modem
how about an always-on, LOW LATENCY DSL modem
-sam
i've watched a few interviews with lawrence lessig (stanford law professor) and have come away with mixed feelings. on the one hand, sometimes he seems to 'get it' as far as what open source and free software are about (the former about the business model, the latter about the freedom). on the other hand he seems (at least to me) to misrepresent the importance of napster at any opportunity (but then again, that is the only topic i've seen an interviewer ask him a question about).
all in all he actually does good things, and i like the thought of someone like him teaching at the best law school in the country. maybe the next generation of IP lawyers will know which side of the fence to stand on.
but then again, with stanford tuition being what it is, and the MPAA/RIAA paying what they do, don't count on it, i guess.
-sam
hrm...
perhaps in your experience XP is as stable as linux, in my experience it most certainly has NOT. anyway... most of your arguments are very strange coming from this side of the fence.
"It's faster than linux with KDE; it runs numerous aps Linux can't support (EverQuest, DAoC, Tribes 2)."
different tools for the job. of COURSE people who want to play EverQuest, DAoC, and Tribes 2 are going to have a windows machine. those are all windows software titles (as an aside, DAoC is one of the great ones ever, IMHO).
but to reiterate, perhaps windows XP is as stable as linux in your experience. i am not alone to say that i have had the opposite experience. but i will say that by service pack 2 or 3, windows XP looks VERY promising, because it really makes a lot of things easier, such as dragging files to your CD drive in windows explorer, and clicking 'burn CD'. that is intuitive and good (of course it is also a rip-off of other operating systems, but hey, everyone should take the good ideas and go with them if they can). however as of right now, it runs some games SLOWER than windows ME (pool of radiance, for example, which as an aside really sucks). XP has a long way to go before i think about upgrading from windows 2000, because win2k does everything i want it to do, and doesn't crash on me like XP does (at work i have two identical systems, one running each OS. i invariably use the win2k machine because i don't want to keep losing work).
bet you thought i was going to say 'linux' at least once in this post. yup, the server is still running, 254 days uptime. different tools for different jobs, i would not try to have a windows box host the sourceforge server if i were you.
-sam
lately try using win 95 as a firewall/dns/router on a 386?
have fun.
-sam
try using windowsupdate to get the latest directx (8.1) for windows 95 (see older slashdot story).
-sam
you don't HAVE to upgrade your linux box, either. but at least you have the OPTION of upgrading for FREE, instead of paying year after year if you want to upgrade.
as you said, you are happy with win98, more power to you. but many people are not happy with windows and have to shell out big bucks every couple years to upgrade.
yeah, i know, the post was flamebait. but hey, i'm a sucker for anything this obvious.
-sam
that sounds like the episode of ST:TNG when they find scotty and he is advising geordi of how to really become an awe-inspiring engineer. something along the lines of (heavily paraphrasing from distant memory):
scotty: why did ya tell the cap'n it would take 1 week?
geordi: because that is about how long i think it will take.
scotty: (sighing). i know, but ye tell the cap'n 2 weeks, and when you finish it in 1, they'll think yer a genius.
-sam
HAL--IBM
VMS--WNT
-sam
stacks of XBox consoles in the research trangle park area. no gamecubes left, though. and if you really want to think xbox graphics are good... well, go to blockbuster and rent one and halo, and rent a PS2 and one of the recent (2nd gen) releases, like metal gear solid 2, etc. have fun.
-sam
my main beef with baldur's gate is it was, in the end, an entirely too simplistic game. it was completely linear: go from point A to point B, killing monsters C, D, and E. there is no element of RP that i could find - you could say different things at different times, but none of them seemed to make any 'real' difference.
also, the difficulty level 'normal' was laughable. 'hard' is still very, very easy, but at least some of the bosses are a little more interesting (but still pushovers).
i'll agree that the water and the pushable boxes (and the powder kegs!) are pretty cool. they seem to have the engine pretty well down, but this version seems to be a game without an audience: too simple for older gamers, too bloody for younger gamers. but the engine leads me to want more:
1. more races
2. more classes
3. more player customization (names, size, color, etc)
4. ONLINE PLAY
5. more non-linear story elements
6. more puzzles/traps
but like i said, it is a great first offering on the console for Baldur's Gate. but i hate to disappoint, act I is by far the best act. however act ii has some really nicely rendered caves, and some monsters which hearken back to the days of pen and paper dnd (frost giants, displacer beasts!). i just hope they take the engine to its potential in the next version (ONLINE PLEASE!!).
-sam
i've played a lot of games, and gone 'wow' at some of the eye candy, but if you've played baldur's gate for PS2 you know that the coolest thing that has ever been coded for a game is the WATER for this game. you leave a wake behind you when you walk through it, you splash when you jump in, and ripples interact and reflect from the shore. maybe the physics aren't 'perfect' or whatever, but the realism of the water was enough to really 'immerse' myself into the game.
-sam
also contradicts an even older law: "you can't get somethin' fer' nothin'." i'm sure it sounded much more impressive in the original sumerian.
-sam
i actually did buy my tickets about a week and a half ago (dork alert). i'll have to wait in line again unless i want to sit in the back corners next to the speakers, or in the front row with my neck craning up to see the screen.
oh, and yes i am a geek (obviously), but self-respecting? that's pushing it.
-sam
how to decide? wait in line, get FF X, or wait in line, go to LOTR? both probably. i guess i should just go ahead and take the day off from work while i'm at it.
-sam
uh... the explanation is the oldest in the fantasy genre. it was his destiny. the ring came to him, the 'most unlikely of persons' or something like that. basically that is like asking, why could arthur draw the sword from the stone, or something like that. it's the oldest trick in the genre, or alternatively, the answer you give your kids if they keep asking 'why?' time and time again for each answer.
-sam
gandalf spoke those words in rivendell when proving the ring's authenticity to elrond and the council.
:(
i say DAMN i am a hopeless dork
-sam
the HP books are basically like long scooby doo episodes. long bunch of walking around, then at the end there is a flurry of action and the enemy has his big plastic mask pulled off, screaming 'if it weren't for you kids...'
-sam