I really don't see what everybody is whining about. Those prices are still a steal of a deal compared to cable/satellite subscriptions, and in my particular case it will raise my rate by $1 at the most. Oh woe is me. Since I signed up they have grown their streaming library massively while dealing with backwards content companies. Sure I have complaints; I really wish they would make an effort to enable streaming on Linux, but I think they deserve some slack on this one. Apparently some people just won't be satisfied until Netflix gives it all to them for free and sends their CEO over to give them a happy ending as well.
But you have to remember that the biggest roadblock to next-gen entertainment is big content and cable companies, whose aging business models are threatened by anything innovative. Cable companies may whine about bandwidth, but really, everybody knows it's about their core cable TV business. These industries have demonstrated time and time again that they will drag the entire economy and innovation itself down with them before they will reinvent themselves to change with the times.
"Why is the industry hell-bent on not giving customers what they want?"
For the same reason they load new machines with mountains of crapware that ruins the user experience. To make a quick buck. Seriously, the industry cares less and less about making a decent product that does the job that it needs to and satisfies the customer, and more about the instant-gratification revenue. It's no wonder users are flocking to Apple in droves. Then again, I don't see any Macs with matte screens either. The only manufacturer I know of that you can still get a matte screen from is Lenovo.
First of all, how long before this system actually pays for itself considering the cost of putting these devices on every vehicle in the U.S.?
Secondly, you know these devices are going to be tampered with like no tomorrow; and what about the ones that malfunction and don't report mileage accurately?
Thirdly, there are some serious Orwellian implications here, obviously. I don't think I need to elaborate.
Just raise the blasted gas tax. This is to maintain the roads, correct? Doesn't a Hummer cause far more wear and tear to the roads than a Prius? Oh, but that wouldn't favor the rich jerks with their massive vehicles. We can nickel and dime everyone to death with this nonsense, but heaven forbid we take away the tax cuts for the top 2% because that would be bad for the economy. The middle class just needs to bend over and take one more for the team, right?
Doesn't sound like an unreasonable price tag, but that is assuming the money actually gets spent where it accomplishes something. This has the potential to become another profiteering complex where hundreds of different(and/or redundant) cybersecurity firms exist that nobody can keep track of.
If this turns out to be true I will be absolutely baffled, considering how timid Dell has always been about using AMD chips in their machines in the first place. Overall I don't think it would be good for the second largest x86 chip manufacturer to be owned and controlled by a PC maker; especially one that tends to cut corners in my opinion (*cough* capacitors *cough*). Ditching Intel altogether would be a horrible strategy also. Even with the days of the wintel alliance over, they still have a presence and brand recognition in the PC and server markets that is completely unmatched by anyone.
Seriously though, Apple's greatest achievement is how they have managed to wrap the public and the tech media around their little finger. The dust hasn't even quite settled from the first iPad launch and I am already seeing articles plastered all over the place about the 'rumors' of the iPad 2.
I honestly wish every browser would do this with every toolbar. They are worthless and annoying. Seriously, toolbars should have gone away with the early 2000s, and here they still are all over the place like damn cockroaches. On windows I have another one humping my leg every time I turn around. They don't even provide any useful functionality besides taking up screen space and slowing everything down. Unrequested software that automatically installs by default with other software should be banned; plain and simple. If I took my car in to get new tires and they installed an enormous, ugly spoiler with their logo all over it at the same time I would be livid. Anyone would. So why is anyone tolerating this nonsense?
"But companies that use such programs spend more on such things as learning to use them and making them work with other software".
There are so many things wrong with this. Sure, that could very well be true in some cases, but it is entirely dependent on the situation. They are stating an extremely vague idea it as if it were an absolute in every scenario. If this really was an unbiased study they wouldn't be regurgitating this worn-out claim.
If this had been announced a few years ago, I might have been disappointed. I honestly like UT2004 better, which works nicely on Linux. Honestly though, major commercial games on Linux will never be unless two things happen: MAJOR improvements to its multimedia support (both sound and video architecture are a total mess), and a single distro must step forward as the supported face of desktop Linux. Probably Ubuntu. I'll likely be castigated for saying that, but that is the only way it can ever happen IMO.
Dude, I like Chrome OS. Pretty excited for it, actually. I was being satirical if that wasn't already painfully obvious. Take a stool softener or something.
According to what the ISPs have been claiming for the last several years, the Internet should have already ceased to function by now. In 07-08 I was seeing doomsday prophesies of the 2010 Internet apocalypse all over the place. It's all a bunch of exaggerated baloney designed to scare everyone into killing net neutrality.
In any case they have absolutely no reason to complain. They offer a service which their customers pay for, and at a much higher price than most other countries I might add. Customers also pay a higher price for a connection with more bandwidth. Should be simple enough, right? All Netflix is doing is creating a massive demand for the service they offer. That should be a dream come true for them. Last time I checked they were making record profits, so surely they can upgrade their networks to keep up with demand, especially when the cost of network infrastructure is constantly dropping. Not as simple as that you say? Well then they should have anticipated this before they offered "unlimited" Internet access. Changing the rules now would basically amount to a bait-and-switch. If customers start getting mobile-phone style bill shock when they go over their bandwidth cap, sh*t will hit the fan. Unfortunately, any fat-cat executive is going to be miffed when they see an opportunity to nickel-and-dime that isn't being exploited for all it is worth.
Yes....... HTML5 is the future............... The very distant future. Nice to see somebody laying it out straight for once. I'm enthusiastic about it's potential and really do hope it replaces flash eventually, but lets be realistic. This is years down the road. I wish more people would realize that. Thank you Steve Jobs. Thank you for keeping all the less tech-savvy users so well informed.
I use Combofix. It has to be able to connect to the Internet to update, though. Unless you want to constantly download the newest version onto the drive.
I don't see where opponents of net neutrality have much room to talk when it comes to preserving the free market. The Internet is the largest example of a free market in existence in my humble opinion. Allowing a few large corporations the kind of control over it that they have been lobbying for would absolutely neuter that. Imagine the job losses when thousands of businesses get slowly forced out of what had formerly been a completely level playing field.
Here come the people screaming about how this proves Linux and open source aren't any more secure bla bla bla. Linux is not invulnerable. No OS is or ever will be. However, so long as Linux infections are so rare that each one that appears makes headlines, I will feel much more secure using it as opposed to Windows. This is the second Linux infection I have heard of in the last year or two. Compare that to the countless hoards of Windows malware we see every day. Is is only because Windows systems are far more common? Probably. Do I care? No. Why should I? Desktop Linux will likely never see the same market share that windows has, and that is just fine with me. Any kind of mono-culture is asking for trouble no matter what OS it consists of.
Indeed. And I do believe the ISPs owe quite a bit of their customer base to Google. Haven't services like Youtube increased their subscriber numbers significantly? This is less about what is fair and more about sour grapes at the fact that Youtube is an absolute sensation passing over their lines and they aren't making a goldmine off of it.
If all patents worked the way software patents do then I would so be the first one to patent my revolutionary method for taking a crap while sitting down.
Like windows or any operating system linux is only as secure as the user keeps it. In a way this is sort of a win because it means linux is now popular enough for the malware makers to pay attention to it, and it will motivate the linux community to be more vigilant. Welcome to the mainstream and everything that comes with it. This highlights the advantage of using software repositories as well............
Exactly. That is what the big ISPs want and the government wouldn't be able to think up any other incentives to keep them happy otherwise when the net neutrality rules keep them from doing it. I guess I worded it poorly but trust me we are on the same side on this issue.:)
"saying they're concerned that new regulations would slow down investment in broadband networks." Aka, the providers will hold our broadband future hostage if they don't get their way. Craptastic. With this many people pitching a fit perhaps they should come up with some other incentives to keep the telcos happy, although I have no idea what would be as tantalizing as being able to auction off their bandwidth to the highest bidders.
Slashdot Mirror
I really don't see what everybody is whining about. Those prices are still a steal of a deal compared to cable/satellite subscriptions, and in my particular case it will raise my rate by $1 at the most. Oh woe is me. Since I signed up they have grown their streaming library massively while dealing with backwards content companies. Sure I have complaints; I really wish they would make an effort to enable streaming on Linux, but I think they deserve some slack on this one. Apparently some people just won't be satisfied until Netflix gives it all to them for free and sends their CEO over to give them a happy ending as well.
But you have to remember that the biggest roadblock to next-gen entertainment is big content and cable companies, whose aging business models are threatened by anything innovative. Cable companies may whine about bandwidth, but really, everybody knows it's about their core cable TV business. These industries have demonstrated time and time again that they will drag the entire economy and innovation itself down with them before they will reinvent themselves to change with the times.
"Why is the industry hell-bent on not giving customers what they want?" For the same reason they load new machines with mountains of crapware that ruins the user experience. To make a quick buck. Seriously, the industry cares less and less about making a decent product that does the job that it needs to and satisfies the customer, and more about the instant-gratification revenue. It's no wonder users are flocking to Apple in droves. Then again, I don't see any Macs with matte screens either. The only manufacturer I know of that you can still get a matte screen from is Lenovo.
First of all, how long before this system actually pays for itself considering the cost of putting these devices on every vehicle in the U.S.? Secondly, you know these devices are going to be tampered with like no tomorrow; and what about the ones that malfunction and don't report mileage accurately? Thirdly, there are some serious Orwellian implications here, obviously. I don't think I need to elaborate. Just raise the blasted gas tax. This is to maintain the roads, correct? Doesn't a Hummer cause far more wear and tear to the roads than a Prius? Oh, but that wouldn't favor the rich jerks with their massive vehicles. We can nickel and dime everyone to death with this nonsense, but heaven forbid we take away the tax cuts for the top 2% because that would be bad for the economy. The middle class just needs to bend over and take one more for the team, right?
Intel would have been better off keeping Moblin by itself. Even the name Meego sounds retarded. Now the whole brand is damaged goods.
Doesn't sound like an unreasonable price tag, but that is assuming the money actually gets spent where it accomplishes something. This has the potential to become another profiteering complex where hundreds of different(and/or redundant) cybersecurity firms exist that nobody can keep track of.
If this turns out to be true I will be absolutely baffled, considering how timid Dell has always been about using AMD chips in their machines in the first place. Overall I don't think it would be good for the second largest x86 chip manufacturer to be owned and controlled by a PC maker; especially one that tends to cut corners in my opinion (*cough* capacitors *cough*). Ditching Intel altogether would be a horrible strategy also. Even with the days of the wintel alliance over, they still have a presence and brand recognition in the PC and server markets that is completely unmatched by anyone.
Seriously though, Apple's greatest achievement is how they have managed to wrap the public and the tech media around their little finger. The dust hasn't even quite settled from the first iPad launch and I am already seeing articles plastered all over the place about the 'rumors' of the iPad 2.
I honestly wish every browser would do this with every toolbar. They are worthless and annoying. Seriously, toolbars should have gone away with the early 2000s, and here they still are all over the place like damn cockroaches. On windows I have another one humping my leg every time I turn around. They don't even provide any useful functionality besides taking up screen space and slowing everything down. Unrequested software that automatically installs by default with other software should be banned; plain and simple. If I took my car in to get new tires and they installed an enormous, ugly spoiler with their logo all over it at the same time I would be livid. Anyone would. So why is anyone tolerating this nonsense?
"But companies that use such programs spend more on such things as learning to use them and making them work with other software". There are so many things wrong with this. Sure, that could very well be true in some cases, but it is entirely dependent on the situation. They are stating an extremely vague idea it as if it were an absolute in every scenario. If this really was an unbiased study they wouldn't be regurgitating this worn-out claim.
A man of his stature reduced to a simple patent troll. What on earth is he thinking?
If this had been announced a few years ago, I might have been disappointed. I honestly like UT2004 better, which works nicely on Linux. Honestly though, major commercial games on Linux will never be unless two things happen: MAJOR improvements to its multimedia support (both sound and video architecture are a total mess), and a single distro must step forward as the supported face of desktop Linux. Probably Ubuntu. I'll likely be castigated for saying that, but that is the only way it can ever happen IMO.
Dude, I like Chrome OS. Pretty excited for it, actually. I was being satirical if that wasn't already painfully obvious. Take a stool softener or something.
Great idea Mr. Jobs, I mean Schmidt. Sorry.
According to what the ISPs have been claiming for the last several years, the Internet should have already ceased to function by now. In 07-08 I was seeing doomsday prophesies of the 2010 Internet apocalypse all over the place. It's all a bunch of exaggerated baloney designed to scare everyone into killing net neutrality. In any case they have absolutely no reason to complain. They offer a service which their customers pay for, and at a much higher price than most other countries I might add. Customers also pay a higher price for a connection with more bandwidth. Should be simple enough, right? All Netflix is doing is creating a massive demand for the service they offer. That should be a dream come true for them. Last time I checked they were making record profits, so surely they can upgrade their networks to keep up with demand, especially when the cost of network infrastructure is constantly dropping. Not as simple as that you say? Well then they should have anticipated this before they offered "unlimited" Internet access. Changing the rules now would basically amount to a bait-and-switch. If customers start getting mobile-phone style bill shock when they go over their bandwidth cap, sh*t will hit the fan. Unfortunately, any fat-cat executive is going to be miffed when they see an opportunity to nickel-and-dime that isn't being exploited for all it is worth.
Yes....... HTML5 is the future............... The very distant future. Nice to see somebody laying it out straight for once. I'm enthusiastic about it's potential and really do hope it replaces flash eventually, but lets be realistic. This is years down the road. I wish more people would realize that. Thank you Steve Jobs. Thank you for keeping all the less tech-savvy users so well informed.
I use Combofix. It has to be able to connect to the Internet to update, though. Unless you want to constantly download the newest version onto the drive.
I don't see where opponents of net neutrality have much room to talk when it comes to preserving the free market. The Internet is the largest example of a free market in existence in my humble opinion. Allowing a few large corporations the kind of control over it that they have been lobbying for would absolutely neuter that. Imagine the job losses when thousands of businesses get slowly forced out of what had formerly been a completely level playing field.
Here come the people screaming about how this proves Linux and open source aren't any more secure bla bla bla. Linux is not invulnerable. No OS is or ever will be. However, so long as Linux infections are so rare that each one that appears makes headlines, I will feel much more secure using it as opposed to Windows. This is the second Linux infection I have heard of in the last year or two. Compare that to the countless hoards of Windows malware we see every day. Is is only because Windows systems are far more common? Probably. Do I care? No. Why should I? Desktop Linux will likely never see the same market share that windows has, and that is just fine with me. Any kind of mono-culture is asking for trouble no matter what OS it consists of.
Indeed. And I do believe the ISPs owe quite a bit of their customer base to Google. Haven't services like Youtube increased their subscriber numbers significantly? This is less about what is fair and more about sour grapes at the fact that Youtube is an absolute sensation passing over their lines and they aren't making a goldmine off of it.
If all patents worked the way software patents do then I would so be the first one to patent my revolutionary method for taking a crap while sitting down.
Like windows or any operating system linux is only as secure as the user keeps it. In a way this is sort of a win because it means linux is now popular enough for the malware makers to pay attention to it, and it will motivate the linux community to be more vigilant. Welcome to the mainstream and everything that comes with it. This highlights the advantage of using software repositories as well............
Exactly. That is what the big ISPs want and the government wouldn't be able to think up any other incentives to keep them happy otherwise when the net neutrality rules keep them from doing it. I guess I worded it poorly but trust me we are on the same side on this issue. :)
"saying they're concerned that new regulations would slow down investment in broadband networks." Aka, the providers will hold our broadband future hostage if they don't get their way. Craptastic. With this many people pitching a fit perhaps they should come up with some other incentives to keep the telcos happy, although I have no idea what would be as tantalizing as being able to auction off their bandwidth to the highest bidders.
I see the usual complaints about the FOSS fanatics but with an absence of the FOSS fanatics. o_O