I think it safe to say that most spammers send out more than 5,000 email's a year. Perhaps setting that as a top limit of what defines a person as a spammer. Just a thought
The problem with giving the 'spammer' label to anyone who sends 5000 (or any arbitrary number) is that you will label people sending legitmate emails that are easily at or above that number.
My business partners and I share, via email, anything that is safe to be emailed. We even invoice our customers via email. On a slow day, the company sends 30 emails per day (not counting internal messages)...if we only work 300 days per year (yeah right), our company is sending 9000 legit emails per year. How can you call that spam (other than the fact that nobody really wants to be sent an invoice of any kind, it's still not unsolicited)? Could you imagine what kind of email traffic *LARGE* corporations have between each other? MY guess is it beats your limit on a weekly basis, if not daily.
I agree with you that spam should just be made illegal, outright - I can only dream of that happening to snail mail junk too. The question of defining spam/spammers and the enforcement of any regulation/law (my own draconian urgings aside) is something that needs to be addressed by the 'experts'.
Nowhere did the article bother to talk about the woes of the economy.
Maybe I'm just a freak, but I know if I'm trying to curtail my spending, as many are in the uncertain economy, music purchases would be one of the first things I'd stop.
I know, their sales have been diminishing since before the US economy started heading south, but it's a possibility.
Maybe if the price of a cd was less than 700% profict for RIAA (dont know the number, but I know it's HUGE), and they cost what they were worth they would sell more.
I know this is theory, but I was taught in my econ class back in college that the sale price was where the supply and demand curve met. That point was the price that the consumer considered 'fair'.
Maybe RIAA needs to think about THAT. Maybe more and more consumers are thinking that cd's are just not worth the money and are settling for what's on the radio and not buying cd's. I'm sure some are turning to P2P software too, but I imagine that really is the minority.
I dont download music (used to - delted them all) and I will buy cd's. I've not bought one in almost 6 months because there hasnt been one that I think is worth the money.
Maybe I didnt think there were any worth the money because they are cookie cutter as the article stated. Maybe it's because it's just too damned expensive.
Are those 1,000,00 customer addresses really spam messages, though? They are previous customers, which means that they have already demonstrated an interest in your product or service. Which makes it obvious that you'd be more likely to get a higher response from those addresses.
The random ones...now THAT is spam. These people may not have known you even existed before, let alone have any interest in your offerings.
That might be the point you were trying to make. If so, I didnt see it.
My web browser is certainly not in a public place.
Uhhh....you may be right, your browser is not, however...
What comes into and goes out of your browser, may very well be in a public place, unless you are browsing an intranet, which since you've posted here, you're obviously not restricting yourself that much.
If you can be absolutely sure that your traffic never touches a network that has nothing to do with the government, your statement would be true. The chances of that are pretty damned slim since a lot of big pipes in the US have some affiliation with a publicly funded university.
However, while their motivation may be different, your ISP could monitor everything you do and it would be akin to retail stores with security cameras.
Please understand, I dislike the idea as much as anyone, I just dont know if there's much we can do about it.
However, I won't buy an AMD processor now, regardless of how well it performs.
Just curious if you're one of the folks who, a few years ago, said they'd never buy an Intel chip when they announced the CPU ID because of privacy concerns?
If so, and you want to continue running x86 hardware, while periodically upgrading to more recent hardware, you'd better start your own chip plant, or find a 3rd alternative (I think Cyrix disapeered a long time ago).
Dont get me wrong, I understand your claim. Just remember that Intel is far from innocent.
Tell me again, why my next computer shouldnt be a Mac?
Why can't the rest of the population see him the same way?
I wish they could see him that way too, but the deal is...he's not in the academic community, he's in the real-world business community.
The academic community has a unique viewpoint of almost everything, and those viewpoints sometimes tend to not settle well with the general public.
I, for one, have different viewpoints on most issues than most folks I know who live/work in academia, which is one reason I no longer live/work in academia...it was just too frustrating working with people I disagreed with on fundamental issues.
When these kids graduate, they're gonna use whatever their jobs tell them to use. If its Microsoft, then that's what they'll use (at least if they want a paycheck).
True, but eventually, these 'kids' will move into decision maing positions. Hopefully, they will have the same feelings as the article claims they have now. I know I do, and being forced to use MS products at work (even though I'm a Solaris admin) makes me hate it even more.
I'm getting ready to move into a decision making role, and I will have non-MS products everywhere it makes sense. I hate to say it, but some of their products do have some value (flamebait, I know).
In some countries, such as New Zealand, it's illegal to sell DVD players that honour region coding, as it's against Fair Trade laws.
Man, I hope nobody that's ever sold a non-region code conforming DVD player in NZ ever comes to the US, for their sake. They might get arrested for violating the DMCA.
some airlines use this type of sytem
on
TuVox Voice Interface
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I went to Seattle a few years ago, but my bags didnt. Outside of the Beast being based next door to Seattle, it is a wonderful city. I called the airline (United) and was asked to 'press or say' whichever number was to get an update for lost luggage.
It then asked me to speak the destination city and the departure city, then asked for the claim number I got when I reported the bags and it would let me know that theyd still not found my luggage.
This was 2 or 3 years ago and it worked pretty flawlessly, and I'm pretty sure the technology has come along since then too. There were times I had to repeat myself, but that's better than sitting on hold forever just to be told by the person on the other end who's day, in their minds, is worse than yours that you should stop worrying about it and get on with your life.
I think somebody mentioned down below that these corporations need to evolve. It's time to find other sources of revenue. If their only salable "product" is airtime for advertisements, they're in real trouble. Every business that I know that stuck with a single product has gone down the tubes.
I find it interesting that the cable-only channels arent getting involved in this suit...oh wait they 'evolved' already, they get money from adverts *and* subscribers.
Making claims about PVRs becoming as popular as VCRs hurting networks is mostly unfounded. If I like a show, and I'm home when it's on, I'll watch it during the broadcast. I'm not going to wait 'till later so I can skip the commercials...and I dont think I'm a minority here. Hell, I'll even let commercials play sometimes when I'm watching a recording - gives me a chance to get a drink or snack or whatever.
I can skip the commercials just as easily with a VCR as I can with a Tivo. ReplayTV does it for you, I know, but unless all (or a vast majority) PVRs were ReplayTV, and shows were *only* being watched from the recording would it then hurt the networks.
You are right, though, about networks worried that they will lose their source of revenue. There were similar issues raised with Betamax and VHS when they came out. Technology eventually won, and hopefully the judges deciding this case arent in the pocket of the studios.
Tivo only calls 'home' once per day, unless forced by the user to make a call.
In order to collect the real-time stats you mention, it would required a constant connection. Most people wouldnt stand for that since, if they have one, they like to use their phone for other reasons.
There are PVRs that have broadband connectivity, that very well could send real-time data to the mothership. As has been discussed here and other palces many times, there's a sizeable limit to the availabilty of broadband that phone access just doesnt encounter.
Besides, those broadband capable PVR's are more costly for the startup fee, and I dont think they are hackable either.
Presumably the record companies defer to the bands on this point.
Well, the way I understand recording contracts is that the recording company owns the recording, but the band still owns the music. The band rarely gets enough of a cut from the contract that sales hurt their personal bottom line. Huge bands like Pearl Jam, Metallica et al are big enough to negotiate that sort of deal. This is why Lars from Metallica was one of the few artists who cared about Napster. If you'll notice the RIAA, not the artists, is suing people. They claim they are protecting the artists, but they are really looking out for their own pockets.
Most bands dont make money on the record, they make money on the concerts and appearances. Granted, they do make money, but it's usually small compared to what they make from other sources...why else would they tour? The recordings basically serve them as advertisements.
The bands typically own all rights to the music itself (not the recording) and they have the right to allow or disallow fans to record concerts.
Usual dislaimers apply...IANAL, esp a contract lawyer, and have never seen a 'typical' recording contract and am just make observations on what I've heard and read.
I know the original posting said it was strong language, but there are just too many games out there that use OpenGL that are too popular to be crushed.
Besides, OpenGL is goverened by a board of companies, not just SGI.
It'll be two decades before we fully recover from the harm Clinton did to this country and to the world.
OK, the man had his faults. OK, the man did some (many) things I didnt like either. What I dont understand is why you think it will take 20yrs to recover from a married man lying about getting a blow job...most (98%+) married men would at least TRY lie thier wat out of it, just as he did.
FWIW, I know Russians who were still in Russia when the scandal happened. They refised to ridicule me for being a yankee at the time, because at least our Pres could get it up!
Now, how am I going to keep my kids away from this filth? I can't watch them 24/7.
So I have to suffer by having my rights taken away because you can't keep your willy in your pants (or someone else's out of, depending on the case) and keep track of the result on your own?
There was an article at the NYT [nytimes.com] about how they deal with Nazi content in games a few days ago. Pretty interesting stuff and imho I would not mind if that stuff is banned.
Well, spealing n terms of banning such things in the USA, I would have a problem with it. It's called the First Ammendment to the Constitution.
I have the right to say what I want, and if having a schwastica (sp) on my sleeve is what I want to do, then I have that right. You have the right to not like it and to say something to me about it, but that's about it. You dont have the right to make me stop putting the arm band on my sleeve.
Personally, I think you're a freakin idiot if you agree with the Nazi's, but I also respect your right to agree with them.
...we don't live in a perfect society so if banning violent video games stops some numbskull bodyslamming his sister to death it is certainly worth considering rather than dismissing out of hand!
Sorry, I must disagree. What needs to happen is that we need to have accountability instilled in our minds (no matter where you are). Unless you're totally mentally unstable, you should know that if you're messing up you're going to have to pay a price of some kind.
Sadly, we dont have that accountability instilled in us, we blame Marylin Manson, Quake, Black Sabbath, and GI Joe because they are violent.
If we're going to turn this country into a nice soft happy place to live, then it's going to suck. The US Constitution provides us the right to say, do, think, be almost anything we want (please dont play devil's advocate, I know the limits).
If those freedoms are taken away, then this place is no better than a totalitarian country where the people are told what they can do, when they can do it and where they are allowed to do it. Right now, we're allowed to do what we want, when we want where we want to do it as long as we're not violating laws (some of which are deemed unConstitutional by many).
If I want to set a PS2 up in my driveway, set a projector up to play Grand Theft Auto on my garage door so you can see what I'm doing from a plane at 20,000 feet...I'm allowed to as long as I dont violate any city ordinaces or noise pollution laws. Sure, people can bitch, and they have every right to bitch - but I'm perfectly within my Constitutional rights to play my game and the ONLY thing they have the right to do is bitch.
The shame in it is that I'll end up being made to shutdown my PS2 'for the children', so as not to warp their minds with the violence of the game.
Please note, that I was born and raised in the US, live in the US and consider the US (with all of our faults) the best alternative right now, it's just that we're starting to get so many laws and court orders that we're turning this place into the Socialist Republic of America.
I agree about a Video game channel turning into a giant infomercial. Look at Speedvision, for those who think there's too much motorsports coverage on 'regular' TV (networks, ESPN, whatever) - there's not enough to keep the infomercials away from there.
TechTV has a decent show about gaming called Extended Play. Sometimes they do other than game stuff, but it's always related.
Anyway, I think a few more shows would be good, but a whole channel? It'd just be re-run after re-run of the same 'news' show you just saw, or a ton of infomercials or both.
Which they don't get from Microsoft. Except for the phone number.
Unless I'm misunderstanding both of you..this is skroz's point.
I'm not a fan of M$. Most corporate folks want their people to be able to *talk* to someone with a pulse at 3:17am when the damned thing dies (not chat or email). If the support people can't talk the local people through the problem, then they need to send someone out who can fix it...now.
Granted, I dont know if M$ works this way, and I seriously doubt it. I know for a fact that, given the correct support level agreement with MAJOR storage and UNIX vendors that it works like this. Granted, many places do not have the money to spend on this level of support, but the ones who do usually set the standards.
No linux/Intel (or any hardware) support offers this level of service.
There are many things that linux is missing before it can bacome true mainstream.
It's missing a 100% user-friendly, dummy-can-operate, anyone-can-use-it-to-install-and-configure interface
It's missing a slew of industry standard applications applications that will help vault it into the eyes of the people who make the decisions
Most importantly, it's missing commercial support.
Commercial support for linux will never be as good as it can be unless more people use linux (I'm not saying it will never be good). Nobody's going to port the applications unless people use linux, and nobody's going to use it until these other two happen.
I love linux, and would love to see it hit the big time, but I'm a realist and somewhat a pessimist (sp).
With the understanding that you would wield considerable power over a very large corporation, how would you go about bringing Microsoft into compliance with the federal mandates while still striving to innovate and serve customers? How do you plan to not let these mandates stifle the company into not providing the same return it has given to its investors over the past years?
Before anyone flames...I'm playing devils advocate here...I personally dont care what happens to MS as long as they stop screwing me over.
You only get 5.1 sound if the movie was recorded that way, and most DVD's (at least in my collection) are already 5.1 sound (assuming the movie was recorded with the eoncoding).
A new media format alone cannot add sound that's not in the recording. Anyone can remaster the sound track and add the other channels with current media formats.
Better quality? I dont see how it's possible to get better picture quality with same antiquated technology that is inside most people's TV.
Everyday I think M$ is turning out to be more analageous (sp) to Taco Bell in the movie Demolition Man.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it safe to say that most spammers send out more than 5,000 email's a year. Perhaps setting that as a top limit of what defines a person as a spammer. Just a thought
The problem with giving the 'spammer' label to anyone who sends 5000 (or any arbitrary number) is that you will label people sending legitmate emails that are easily at or above that number.
My business partners and I share, via email, anything that is safe to be emailed. We even invoice our customers via email. On a slow day, the company sends 30 emails per day (not counting internal messages)...if we only work 300 days per year (yeah right), our company is sending 9000 legit emails per year. How can you call that spam (other than the fact that nobody really wants to be sent an invoice of any kind, it's still not unsolicited)? Could you imagine what kind of email traffic *LARGE* corporations have between each other? MY guess is it beats your limit on a weekly basis, if not daily.
I agree with you that spam should just be made illegal, outright - I can only dream of that happening to snail mail junk too. The question of defining spam/spammers and the enforcement of any regulation/law (my own draconian urgings aside) is something that needs to be addressed by the 'experts'.
Nowhere did the article bother to talk about the woes of the economy.
:wq
Maybe I'm just a freak, but I know if I'm trying to curtail my spending, as many are in the uncertain economy, music purchases would be one of the first things I'd stop.
I know, their sales have been diminishing since before the US economy started heading south, but it's a possibility.
Maybe if the price of a cd was less than 700% profict for RIAA (dont know the number, but I know it's HUGE), and they cost what they were worth they would sell more.
I know this is theory, but I was taught in my econ class back in college that the sale price was where the supply and demand curve met. That point was the price that the consumer considered 'fair'.
Maybe RIAA needs to think about THAT. Maybe more and more consumers are thinking that cd's are just not worth the money and are settling for what's on the radio and not buying cd's. I'm sure some are turning to P2P software too, but I imagine that really is the minority.
I dont download music (used to - delted them all) and I will buy cd's. I've not bought one in almost 6 months because there hasnt been one that I think is worth the money.
Maybe I didnt think there were any worth the money because they are cookie cutter as the article stated. Maybe it's because it's just too damned expensive.
Are those 1,000,00 customer addresses really spam messages, though? They are previous customers, which means that they have already demonstrated an interest in your product or service. Which makes it obvious that you'd be more likely to get a higher response from those addresses.
The random ones...now THAT is spam. These people may not have known you even existed before, let alone have any interest in your offerings.
That might be the point you were trying to make. If so, I didnt see it.
My web browser is certainly not in a public place.
Uhhh....you may be right, your browser is not, however...
What comes into and goes out of your browser, may very well be in a public place, unless you are browsing an intranet, which since you've posted here, you're obviously not restricting yourself that much.
If you can be absolutely sure that your traffic never touches a network that has nothing to do with the government, your statement would be true. The chances of that are pretty damned slim since a lot of big pipes in the US have some affiliation with a publicly funded university.
However, while their motivation may be different, your ISP could monitor everything you do and it would be akin to retail stores with security cameras.
Please understand, I dislike the idea as much as anyone, I just dont know if there's much we can do about it.
However, I won't buy an AMD processor now, regardless of how well it performs.
Just curious if you're one of the folks who, a few years ago, said they'd never buy an Intel chip when they announced the CPU ID because of privacy concerns?
If so, and you want to continue running x86 hardware, while periodically upgrading to more recent hardware, you'd better start your own chip plant, or find a 3rd alternative (I think Cyrix disapeered a long time ago).
Dont get me wrong, I understand your claim. Just remember that Intel is far from innocent.
Tell me again, why my next computer shouldnt be a Mac?
I played that game (M.U.L.E.) for hours on end on my C64. However, I dont think I could do that anymore, I need a little more to keep me interested.
Why can't the rest of the population see him the same way?
I wish they could see him that way too, but the deal is...he's not in the academic community, he's in the real-world business community.
The academic community has a unique viewpoint of almost everything, and those viewpoints sometimes tend to not settle well with the general public.
I, for one, have different viewpoints on most issues than most folks I know who live/work in academia, which is one reason I no longer live/work in academia...it was just too frustrating working with people I disagreed with on fundamental issues.
When these kids graduate, they're gonna use whatever their jobs tell them to use. If its Microsoft, then that's what they'll use (at least if they want a paycheck).
True, but eventually, these 'kids' will move into decision maing positions. Hopefully, they will have the same feelings as the article claims they have now. I know I do, and being forced to use MS products at work (even though I'm a Solaris admin) makes me hate it even more.
I'm getting ready to move into a decision making role, and I will have non-MS products everywhere it makes sense. I hate to say it, but some of their products do have some value (flamebait, I know).
In some countries, such as New Zealand, it's illegal to sell DVD players that honour region coding, as it's against Fair Trade laws.
Man, I hope nobody that's ever sold a non-region code conforming DVD player in NZ ever comes to the US, for their sake. They might get arrested for violating the DMCA.
I went to Seattle a few years ago, but my bags didnt. Outside of the Beast being based next door to Seattle, it is a wonderful city. I called the airline (United) and was asked to 'press or say' whichever number was to get an update for lost luggage.
It then asked me to speak the destination city and the departure city, then asked for the claim number I got when I reported the bags and it would let me know that theyd still not found my luggage.
This was 2 or 3 years ago and it worked pretty flawlessly, and I'm pretty sure the technology has come along since then too. There were times I had to repeat myself, but that's better than sitting on hold forever just to be told by the person on the other end who's day, in their minds, is worse than yours that you should stop worrying about it and get on with your life.
I think somebody mentioned down below that these corporations need to evolve. It's time to find other sources of revenue. If their only salable "product" is airtime for advertisements, they're in real trouble. Every business that I know that stuck with a single product has gone down the tubes.
I find it interesting that the cable-only channels arent getting involved in this suit...oh wait they 'evolved' already, they get money from adverts *and* subscribers.
Making claims about PVRs becoming as popular as VCRs hurting networks is mostly unfounded. If I like a show, and I'm home when it's on, I'll watch it during the broadcast. I'm not going to wait 'till later so I can skip the commercials...and I dont think I'm a minority here. Hell, I'll even let commercials play sometimes when I'm watching a recording - gives me a chance to get a drink or snack or whatever.
I can skip the commercials just as easily with a VCR as I can with a Tivo. ReplayTV does it for you, I know, but unless all (or a vast majority) PVRs were ReplayTV, and shows were *only* being watched from the recording would it then hurt the networks.
You are right, though, about networks worried that they will lose their source of revenue. There were similar issues raised with Betamax and VHS when they came out. Technology eventually won, and hopefully the judges deciding this case arent in the pocket of the studios.
Tivo only calls 'home' once per day, unless forced by the user to make a call.
In order to collect the real-time stats you mention, it would required a constant connection. Most people wouldnt stand for that since, if they have one, they like to use their phone for other reasons.
There are PVRs that have broadband connectivity, that very well could send real-time data to the mothership. As has been discussed here and other palces many times, there's a sizeable limit to the availabilty of broadband that phone access just doesnt encounter.
Besides, those broadband capable PVR's are more costly for the startup fee, and I dont think they are hackable either.
Presumably the record companies defer to the bands on this point.
Well, the way I understand recording contracts is that the recording company owns the recording, but the band still owns the music. The band rarely gets enough of a cut from the contract that sales hurt their personal bottom line. Huge bands like Pearl Jam, Metallica et al are big enough to negotiate that sort of deal. This is why Lars from Metallica was one of the few artists who cared about Napster. If you'll notice the RIAA, not the artists, is suing people. They claim they are protecting the artists, but they are really looking out for their own pockets.
Most bands dont make money on the record, they make money on the concerts and appearances. Granted, they do make money, but it's usually small compared to what they make from other sources...why else would they tour? The recordings basically serve them as advertisements.
The bands typically own all rights to the music itself (not the recording) and they have the right to allow or disallow fans to record concerts.
Usual dislaimers apply...IANAL, esp a contract lawyer, and have never seen a 'typical' recording contract and am just make observations on what I've heard and read.
I know the original posting said it was strong language, but there are just too many games out there that use OpenGL that are too popular to be crushed.
Besides, OpenGL is goverened by a board of companies, not just SGI.
It'll be two decades before we fully recover from the harm Clinton did to this country and to the world.
OK, the man had his faults. OK, the man did some (many) things I didnt like either. What I dont understand is why you think it will take 20yrs to recover from a married man lying about getting a blow job...most (98%+) married men would at least TRY lie thier wat out of it, just as he did.
FWIW, I know Russians who were still in Russia when the scandal happened. They refised to ridicule me for being a yankee at the time, because at least our Pres could get it up!
There _is_ confusion, between 'Windows' and 'Lindows'... SNIP...It's also not up to YOU to decide that there is NO confusion
OH, I get it...HE can't decide there is no confusion while you CAN decide that there IS?
That's a bigger (read more obvious) double standard that the big-M supports themselves!
This is probably because they think/know the majority of their audience are males.
I know I dont want to see another man's penis, but lesbians are cool!
Now, how am I going to keep my kids away from this filth? I can't watch them 24/7.
So I have to suffer by having my rights taken away because you can't keep your willy in your pants (or someone else's out of, depending on the case) and keep track of the result on your own?
There was an article at the NYT [nytimes.com] about how they deal with Nazi content in games a few days ago. Pretty interesting stuff and imho I would not mind if that stuff is banned.
Well, spealing n terms of banning such things in the USA, I would have a problem with it. It's called the First Ammendment to the Constitution.
I have the right to say what I want, and if having a schwastica (sp) on my sleeve is what I want to do, then I have that right. You have the right to not like it and to say something to me about it, but that's about it. You dont have the right to make me stop putting the arm band on my sleeve.
Personally, I think you're a freakin idiot if you agree with the Nazi's, but I also respect your right to agree with them.
...we don't live in a perfect society so if banning violent video games stops some numbskull bodyslamming his sister to death it is certainly worth considering rather than dismissing out of hand!
Sorry, I must disagree. What needs to happen is that we need to have accountability instilled in our minds (no matter where you are). Unless you're totally mentally unstable, you should know that if you're messing up you're going to have to pay a price of some kind.
Sadly, we dont have that accountability instilled in us, we blame Marylin Manson, Quake, Black Sabbath, and GI Joe because they are violent.
If we're going to turn this country into a nice soft happy place to live, then it's going to suck. The US Constitution provides us the right to say, do, think, be almost anything we want (please dont play devil's advocate, I know the limits).
If those freedoms are taken away, then this place is no better than a totalitarian country where the people are told what they can do, when they can do it and where they are allowed to do it. Right now, we're allowed to do what we want, when we want where we want to do it as long as we're not violating laws (some of which are deemed unConstitutional by many).
If I want to set a PS2 up in my driveway, set a projector up to play Grand Theft Auto on my garage door so you can see what I'm doing from a plane at 20,000 feet...I'm allowed to as long as I dont violate any city ordinaces or noise pollution laws. Sure, people can bitch, and they have every right to bitch - but I'm perfectly within my Constitutional rights to play my game and the ONLY thing they have the right to do is bitch.
The shame in it is that I'll end up being made to shutdown my PS2 'for the children', so as not to warp their minds with the violence of the game.
Please note, that I was born and raised in the US, live in the US and consider the US (with all of our faults) the best alternative right now, it's just that we're starting to get so many laws and court orders that we're turning this place into the Socialist Republic of America.
I agree about a Video game channel turning into a giant infomercial. Look at Speedvision, for those who think there's too much motorsports coverage on 'regular' TV (networks, ESPN, whatever) - there's not enough to keep the infomercials away from there.
TechTV has a decent show about gaming called Extended Play. Sometimes they do other than game stuff, but it's always related.
Anyway, I think a few more shows would be good, but a whole channel? It'd just be re-run after re-run of the same 'news' show you just saw, or a ton of infomercials or both.
Just my thoughts...
Unless I'm misunderstanding both of you..this is skroz's point.
I'm not a fan of M$. Most corporate folks want their people to be able to *talk* to someone with a pulse at 3:17am when the damned thing dies (not chat or email). If the support people can't talk the local people through the problem, then they need to send someone out who can fix it...now.
Granted, I dont know if M$ works this way, and I seriously doubt it. I know for a fact that, given the correct support level agreement with MAJOR storage and UNIX vendors that it works like this. Granted, many places do not have the money to spend on this level of support, but the ones who do usually set the standards.
No linux/Intel (or any hardware) support offers this level of service.
There are many things that linux is missing before it can bacome true mainstream.
Commercial support for linux will never be as good as it can be unless more people use linux (I'm not saying it will never be good). Nobody's going to port the applications unless people use linux, and nobody's going to use it until these other two happen.
I love linux, and would love to see it hit the big time, but I'm a realist and somewhat a pessimist (sp).
Just my thoughts.
With the understanding that you would wield considerable power over a very large corporation, how would you go about bringing Microsoft into compliance with the federal mandates while still striving to innovate and serve customers? How do you plan to not let these mandates stifle the company into not providing the same return it has given to its investors over the past years?
Before anyone flames...I'm playing devils advocate here...I personally dont care what happens to MS as long as they stop screwing me over.
It's double the DVD quality and 5.1 sound.
You only get 5.1 sound if the movie was recorded that way, and most DVD's (at least in my collection) are already 5.1 sound (assuming the movie was recorded with the eoncoding).
A new media format alone cannot add sound that's not in the recording. Anyone can remaster the sound track and add the other channels with current media formats.
Better quality? I dont see how it's possible to get better picture quality with same antiquated technology that is inside most people's TV.
Everyday I think M$ is turning out to be more analageous (sp) to Taco Bell in the movie Demolition Man.
Which of the two sides (M$ or DVD manufacturers) feel like they are doing the other a favor?