So now I suppose we have a "Mulder captured by Aliens" plotline while he pumps Fox for more money, sort of like the "Scully captured by Aliens" plotline while she was pregnant? Nice. I still like this show and all, watch it every week, but I think the quality of episodes has severely declined. One more season will be appreciated, I hope they use the time to tie up all the loose plot ends. But in the end, this show has had a pretty good run; it's time to wrap it up before it becomes embarassing.
The company I work for has approximately 200 "on-site" users (i.e. in building), and supports another 50 or so remote users. We have 8 people total in IT. 4 general support techs (myself included), one remote tech/application specialist, 1 network admin, 1 boss/network admin backup, and our secretary. We also have a part-time student we get to kick around 3 times a week:)
We have primaries and backups for all the big jobs (tape backups, remote user support, hand-held support, etc), and 5 of us take shifts on the help-desk phone. Help desk calls (maybe 30-40 a week) are generally of the "I can't login since my Caps Lock is on" variety: not exactly a tidal wave. In general, we all have enough to keep busy, but still have time to pursue those personal projects (how can we get Linux on everyone's desktop;)
No good games so far Hardware's potential is not being used in current games library
The same could have been said for PS1 when it first came out. And you definitely could have said the same for N64's release. Shoot, all the way back to original NES release, what was there...Super Mario Brothers and Duck Hunt? And a couple of games for that stupid robot? Dreamcast released with about 10 games ready on the shelves, and that was considered revolutionary.
It takes a while for great games to come out for a new system, just like it takes a while for programmers to start fully utilizing the hardware. I'm thinking that Sony is playing this about right: an October release gives game manufacturers a month to finish their games and get them on the shelves right at Christmas. I'm betting PS2 will be a huge Christmas seller.
I thought I read something a few weeks ago on CNET that said Sony was planning on adding an internal hard drive and 56k modem to their US release, to keep up with the X-Box specs. Was this just a nasty rumour, or is it possibly a "down-the-road" thing?
$299 is a pretty good opening price, low enough that I'll definitely pick one up. True, all the other systems are cheaper, but I think PS2 will do good for the same reasons hot new processors/video cards always do well when they first come out: the "gee-whiz" factor. N64 is dead save for Perfect Dark, PS1 has lot's of titles, but is really starting to show it's age. Dreamcast might present a challenge if they continue to bring out good games. PS2 has an advantage, I think, because of some of the titles it will have: Gran Turismo, EA Sports Line, etc.
But what is a totally secure e-mail client? One that recieves straight text only. OK, it's secure, but now the bosses want to be able to send attachments. Or they want it to do appointments, tasks, etc. Then it has to synchronize with palm-tops.
My point is, a totally secure e-mail client isn't going to meet the requirements of today's business environment. People expect a certain level of functionality, and bringing giving them that functionality exposes you in a security sense.
Why are drives shared by default in Windows NT 4.0? Wouldn't it make more sense to have them not shared by default, then share them as needed?
Agreed. This is alway's something that's bothered me about NT. That, and it's tendancy to crash for no reason. Or is that 98...;)
because I am freaking smart enough to not click on things that I receive from people I don't know!
Well, bully for you, but some people aren't computer-savvy enough to know better. This is partly an computer-luser educational problem to be sure, but it doesn't excuse the fact that Windows has all these wide, gaping security holes that allow this sort of thing to happen.
Just wait until Linux gets popular enough that people start writing virii/trojan horses that exploit stupid users
Linux IS popular, at least with the type of people who bother to write viruses (i.e. hackers, crackers, script kiddies, whoever). We don't have a problem with Linux viruses because it's hard to write a Linux virus, especially when compared to writing a PC/Windows virus.
At the same time, Best Buy and any other Brick and Mortar retailer makes their CD's available for me to steal. Along with Napster, because the opportunity is there does not mean people take advantage of it.
But at Best Buy and others, you have a way to legally purchase the music, i.e. the register. They also take steps to ensure that you do not simply walk out with the CD (security, those annoying plastics tabs, etc). Napster offers no means to leagally purchase music through their software, and has no way to verify if you are downloading the song legally (you already own a copy of the CD) or not.
Also, the CD's that Best Buy has on their shelves were purchased by Best Buy from a music distributor, and Best Buy is simply reselling the CD to you, offering it's services as a retailer. If you download a song/CD from a Napster user, chances are they didn't pay anyone for the right to redistribute the music to others.
the money supply is being controlled more effectively than back in the day
That's true: Greenspan and the boys have shown they'll raise the Fed rate as high as they need to cool down the economy. How far will they have to go, though? They whack it up 1/4 point, the market hiccups for a couple of days, then just keeps chugging right along.
There would, of course be the serious drying up investment funds
This perhaps suggests another problem: what happens to all those 401k plans out there if the market receeds? Will people choose to draw their money out early (and take the penalty) if they think the slide will be severe? What happens to business if half their employees suddenly decide to cash in their retirement chips?
I agree with you that the government is better equipped to handle a "controlled recession" than back in the 30's. It better happen soon, though, before the economy get's so high we can't control the fall.
I'm sorry, I know I shouldn't be replying to this post, but I actually find it pretty funny. I've seen several other "What about the Children" posts on other topics; don't know if you can call this guy a troll or not, but it's amusing none the less. Best line:
She asked me if we can really be arrested just for loving people.
Dateline: NBC eat your heart out! Props to you AC!
My roommate likes to preach on about how the stock-market is going to crash hard, and usually I just ignore his rantings. However, two interesting items caught my eye in some magazine the other day:
1. Buying stock on margin call's of 50% is now becoming common again. The last time margin calls were this high was right before the '29 crash. 2. The number of individual investors has gone way up over the past 10 years, thanks in large part to internet and day trading. Again, this is what happened right before '29.
My biggest fear about the stock market is not whether internet/technology stocks will go up or down, it's what happens to Joe Investor when they do. People who are not seasoned investors are now putting a significant portion of their money into stocks, internet or otherwise. What happens if tech stocks start to tank across the board? Old pro's will recognize this as a perhaps inevitable market correction. They may sell, or they may wait it out. Likely the experienced trader can afford to take a little hit to the bottom line, so they don't panic.
Joe Ameritrade, on the otherhand, see's all his lovely $80/share stocks suddenly hovering around $20/share. Perhaps he panics, figures he'd better sell everything while he can, and starts to drive the price even lower. A major hit to tech stocks would start to affect other industries as well, dragging the entire market down.
It's not hard for me to belive that a major, sustained downturn of internet/technology stocks would have a long-term, adverse affect on the market and our economy in general. We may not be talking 10 year depression, 30% unemployment, 30's style crises here, but for all of us dependent on information technology for jobs, times might be rough indeed. Brother, can you spare some bandwidth? Will code for food?;)
So what if a bunch of hard rockin millionares are getting ripped off?
I'm sure nobody really cares whether Metallica makes another million dollars or not, but that's not really the point. The point is that people are stealing music. It shouldn't matter if the music being stolen is Metallica's or my great-uncle Fred's. Just because someone is rich doesn't mean it's all right to steal from them, "because they can afford it"
The real problem here isn't why they compiled all sorts of lists of what individual folks had on their computers, but that they did.
When you log onto Napster, you open up a portion of your hard drive for the entire world to see. You can't expect privacy in a situation like that, anymore than you would if you suddenly decided to paint all your personal information on the side of your house. It's not as if Metallica hacked into anyone's system, and obtained a list of songs illegally. If your so worried about privacy, then don't log into Napster! You can't have it both ways.
Throughout these past couple months of Napster controversy, I've yet to see one truely convincing argument that would lead me to believe that downloading MP3's for free is anything but pure and simple theft. Yes, the record industry are a collective bunch of dumbasses for thinking they can turn back the hands of the MP3 clock. Yes, there are a large number of music groups out there making a sick amount of money off of $16 CD's that cost $1 to make. And yes, many have listened to music downloaded off of Napster and run right out to buy a CD they liked it so much; though I would argue that the number of people that have done that are vastly outnumbered by those who just want free music. None of this, however, can validate what Napster is: a software program that facilitates the illegal trade of copyrighted material. Whether this whole issue results in lower music prices, or even free music for all is irrelevant. The ends do not justify the means.
I've not read about any such cases in the States, but recently there have been legal questions in Britain and France about whether an ISP is responsible for web page content that is posted on their servers. Obviously this case has no ramifications for cases outside the US, but if an "ISP responsible for content" suit hasn't already been brought to the courts in the US, it's probably only a matter of time. Any great leagal minds out there that can say whether this case would set any kind of precedent?
If Microsoft is broken up into some form of components that include OS division/Apps (read: Office) division, it is possible that nothing much would change. Your right: the two (theoretical) companies would not compete directly with each other. However, I believe that assuming a clean break-up (i.e., no back-door dealing between the two allowed), things would change for the better.
If Microsoft Apps is suddenly it's own company, free to do with it's products what it wants, what would be their first new product? That's right, Office for Linux. I'm guessing there are a lot of companies out there looking at various Linux distro's as a desktop replacement, and Office compatibility is one major hurdle. StarOffice and Corel Office each have a lot of good things going for them, but in my experience the Office compatibility isn't ready for prime time yet. Bringing Office to Linux would be a very attractive prospect for both businesses as Microsoft Apps.
Assuming a large number of companies do move to Linux on their employee's desktops, we could then expect to see a move to Linux in the homes as well. After all, if Joe User uses Linux 8 hours a day at work, he's probably going to want to have what he's used to at home as well. Maybe he notices that Linux doesn't crash as much as Windows, and let's him (finally) have 10 apps open at the same time. Also, perhaps by this time, we are starting to see more games for Linux as well. Granted, this wouldn't happen over night, but it's not unprecedented. The explosion of home computing can be at least partially credited to the explosion of business computing.
So, now we have Microsoft OS, losing a big foothold in the business world, and starting to see sales slip to home users. What do they need to do to stay competitive? Give the customer what they want: stability, security, a more robust operating environment, etc. Even if they wouldn't open source Windows, they would at least be forced to make a better Windows, or see their sales decline.
The end result? Competition. Competition between Microsoft OS and the various Linux distributors, and perhaps other OS's we haven't considered; competition between Office, StarOffice, and Corel Office; competition between makers of other types of applications, to see who can best support their now Linux-savvy userbase. And that's what this whole mess is all about: competition, or Microsoft's lack thereof.
Headphones would probably work fine, but when you consider everything else that's on the PDA (op system, apps, etc...), it probably doesn't leave much room for the MP3's. I just think that the company should consider marketing this toward the more professional, mobile users (put on a simple contact database?, Quicken type financial tracker?); instead of filling it with "toys".
YOPY stands for spirit of young & intelligent who want to speedy usage of multimedia function through PDA. The target market is young generation whose accustomed to mobile application.
(Marketing Speech Translator On) Well, our focus groups tell us that people like small, shiny things with lots of colors and buttons. And the guys down in Networking are always talking about this Linux thing. Then, Brent came up with that great YOPY name, and bing-bang-bong Chief, we've got a product! (Marketing Speech Translator Off)
Seriously, this looks pretty cool. My only question is why all these new handhelds coming out now think they have to have an MP3 player. Aside from the "Gee Whiz" factor, when would you ever seriously play MP3's on this? Limited memory, microscopic speakers: might as well buy a RIO.
But would AOL really want to distance itself from Windows that much? Even if a break-up were to occur, Windows 9x is still entrenched in A LOT of desktops out there, and a break of that domination would probably take months, if not years. I'm thinking that installing a new OS or buying a new "Internet Appliance" just to keep AOL would be fairly unattractive to many people.
You seem to be saying that all of the games which really require that level of graphic support aren't really your cup of tea, but for tens of thousands of people, it is precisely their cup of tea.
Well, yes, I'll admit that First Person Shooters, typically the graphic kings of the game world, aren't my favorite type of game. There is a certain thrill in running around Q3 like a madman, killing at will. But for the most part, I prefer a more strategy-filled game.
Starcraft does indeed have limited graphics, but you've got to remember that the game is approaching 3 years old. The fact that the game is still actively played by literally thousands of people, both on BattleNet and by themselves, I believe is testament to it's superior gameplay.
Anyway, the point I was trying to make was that game designers lately seem preoccupied with making their games prettier and flashier, rather than better. Take Force Commander, for example. Lucas Arts tried to put the RTS genera in a 3D environment, and failed miserably. The game is filled with 3D models and backgrounds, and you can rotate your camera to every concievable angle. These features, however, make it almost impossible to effectively issue orders to your units and follow the action. Camera control is a mess, the interface is clunky, and the actual gameplay unexciting. I've also been playing Star Trek: Armada, and while it is a far better game than Force Commander, it also sufferes from the same bad camera angles and tired, repetitive gameplay.
I've not had a chance to download the Earth 2150 demo to try it out, hopefully it will be good. I've also heard good things about HomeWorld and the upcoming Halo. And I guess bad games just come with the territory: there wouldn't be good games without bad ones. Still, it's frusterating to buy a game, get all the cool and neat graphic tricks in the world, and absolutely no play value.
Now seriously, I do believe our obsession with video cards has been a bit extreme lately
I had this problem a few months back. I used to have an ATI Rage Fury w/ 32RAM. It did the job pretty well, though I never bothered to benchmark it or check my FPS.
Anyway, I kept reading how hot the TNT2 cards were, and everyone was telling me that they blew everything away. So, being hardware geek I am, I went out and dropped $250 for one. Did it make a difference? Not an appreciable one that I could see. HL Team Fortress Classic seemed to run a little smoother, but for the most part, I couldn't tell any difference.
I managed to hold off on the Geforce cards, but now that the new voodoo's and geforces are coming out, the temptation will be pretty great. Still, it seems to me that the gaming industry needs to be careful not to sacrifice substance for style. Take Q3 and Unreal:Tournament, for example. Two of the best looking games ever, but is the gameplay really that impressive? Yeah, the single-player mode is not the focus of these games, as they're built for on-line play, but it's mostly just the "run and frag" variety, with a little Capture the Flag thrown in for good measure. I played the demo's for both of these, and by the time the actual games came out, I was back to playing Starcraft and Alpha Centauri. Let's hope that game designers don't forget to make good games in their quest for the most impressive looking environment.
Re:Space Privatization -> Scarcity value
on
Hubble Turns 10
·
· Score: 1
Gold is not valuable.
I guess that's why it sells for $300 an ounce, huh? Probably not much use for it in electronics either (RAM, connectors, etc).
I guess I can understand the motivation for parents to want some sort of filtering software, though it seems to me simply educating your children about the internet is a better solution. The people to blame in situations like this are the people who make programs like Cybersitter, CyberPatrol, etc.., and perhaps AOL to a lesser extent.
Cybersitter doesn't advertise the fact that their filtering software may block perfectly acceptable sites, they just tell parents how good it is at blocking port. Likewise, AOL get's feedback from concerned parents, and gives them filtering software without mentioning the potential down-side. Internet newbie parents don't know what's really going on, and since they got filtering software to do their monitoring for them, they don't really bother to check it out.
Hopefully, if stories like these start getting picked up by places like CNET, which reaches a wider audience, people will realize what's really going on.
Yes, I would prefer they didn't report any cyberpatrol stories
Why? So the subject will go away, at least in this forum? What purpose would that serve, other than to further push an important topic out of the spotlight that deserves to be recognized?
Chill out with all this "We've already seen this" crap. Yes, this story is similar to the CyberPatrol stories. It's different (and important), however, because it involves AOL, which is, like it or not, a major force in the internet today. If 30 million (or whatever their subscriber base is now) people live with this for a period of time, they will see it as acceptable behaviour. And that is a situation that none of us wants.
If you don't want to read any more of these types of stories, then don't "Read More" and skip the post. I mean come on, how hard is that?
If no money is to be made then there will be no advancement...Privatization of space would lead to greater interest as space started making more money and this would inspire more people to space....
Your right, there IS money (heli-jack) to be made in space, if not right now then in the near future. Most asteroids are filled with precious minerals (gold, platnium, etc); space tourism will one day be a booming buisiness; zero-G research and manufacturing environments would be beneficial to many industries. The privatization of space will be like the privatization of the internet. Goverment will setup the ground work, such as space/moon/Mars stations, transport shuttles, etc... Once these are in place, and can be achieved at a relatively low cost, the corporate world will be all over it.
Slashdot Mirror
So now I suppose we have a "Mulder captured by Aliens" plotline while he pumps Fox for more money, sort of like the "Scully captured by Aliens" plotline while she was pregnant? Nice. I still like this show and all, watch it every week, but I think the quality of episodes has severely declined. One more season will be appreciated, I hope they use the time to tie up all the loose plot ends. But in the end, this show has had a pretty good run; it's time to wrap it up before it becomes embarassing.
...not as sad as the big Nike swoosh that will be carved into the moon in 20 years ;)
The company I work for has approximately 200 "on-site" users (i.e. in building), and supports another 50 or so remote users. We have 8 people total in IT. 4 general support techs (myself included), one remote tech/application specialist, 1 network admin, 1 boss/network admin backup, and our secretary. We also have a part-time student we get to kick around 3 times a week :)
;)
We have primaries and backups for all the big jobs (tape backups, remote user support, hand-held support, etc), and 5 of us take shifts on the help-desk phone. Help desk calls (maybe 30-40 a week) are generally of the "I can't login since my Caps Lock is on" variety: not exactly a tidal wave. In general, we all have enough to keep busy, but still have time to pursue those personal projects (how can we get Linux on everyone's desktop
No good games so far
Hardware's potential is not being used in current games library
The same could have been said for PS1 when it first came out. And you definitely could have said the same for N64's release. Shoot, all the way back to original NES release, what was there...Super Mario Brothers and Duck Hunt? And a couple of games for that stupid robot? Dreamcast released with about 10 games ready on the shelves, and that was considered revolutionary.
It takes a while for great games to come out for a new system, just like it takes a while for programmers to start fully utilizing the hardware. I'm thinking that Sony is playing this about right: an October release gives game manufacturers a month to finish their games and get them on the shelves right at Christmas. I'm betting PS2 will be a huge Christmas seller.
I thought I read something a few weeks ago on CNET that said Sony was planning on adding an internal hard drive and 56k modem to their US release, to keep up with the X-Box specs. Was this just a nasty rumour, or is it possibly a "down-the-road" thing?
$299 is a pretty good opening price, low enough that I'll definitely pick one up. True, all the other systems are cheaper, but I think PS2 will do good for the same reasons hot new processors/video cards always do well when they first come out: the "gee-whiz" factor. N64 is dead save for Perfect Dark, PS1 has lot's of titles, but is really starting to show it's age. Dreamcast might present a challenge if they continue to bring out good games. PS2 has an advantage, I think, because of some of the titles it will have: Gran Turismo, EA Sports Line, etc.
The second place site in the 5k contest is my favorite. My only fear, however, is that we may be seeing the newest version of Microsoft Paint.
But what is a totally secure e-mail client? One that recieves straight text only. OK, it's secure, but now the bosses want to be able to send attachments. Or they want it to do appointments, tasks, etc. Then it has to synchronize with palm-tops.
;)
My point is, a totally secure e-mail client isn't going to meet the requirements of today's business environment. People expect a certain level of functionality, and bringing giving them that functionality exposes you in a security sense.
Why are drives shared by default in Windows NT 4.0? Wouldn't it make more sense to have them not shared by default, then share them as needed?
Agreed. This is alway's something that's bothered me about NT. That, and it's tendancy to crash for no reason. Or is that 98...
because I am freaking smart enough to not click on things that I receive from people I don't know!
Well, bully for you, but some people aren't computer-savvy enough to know better. This is partly an computer-luser educational problem to be sure, but it doesn't excuse the fact that Windows has all these wide, gaping security holes that allow this sort of thing to happen.
Just wait until Linux gets popular enough that people start writing virii/trojan horses that exploit stupid users
Linux IS popular, at least with the type of people who bother to write viruses (i.e. hackers, crackers, script kiddies, whoever). We don't have a problem with Linux viruses because it's hard to write a Linux virus, especially when compared to writing a PC/Windows virus.
At the same time, Best Buy and any other Brick and Mortar retailer makes their CD's available for me to steal. Along with Napster, because the opportunity is there does not mean people take advantage of it.
But at Best Buy and others, you have a way to legally purchase the music, i.e. the register. They also take steps to ensure that you do not simply walk out with the CD (security, those annoying plastics tabs, etc). Napster offers no means to leagally purchase music through their software, and has no way to verify if you are downloading the song legally (you already own a copy of the CD) or not.
Also, the CD's that Best Buy has on their shelves were purchased by Best Buy from a music distributor, and Best Buy is simply reselling the CD to you, offering it's services as a retailer. If you download a song/CD from a Napster user, chances are they didn't pay anyone for the right to redistribute the music to others.
the money supply is being controlled more effectively than back in the day
That's true: Greenspan and the boys have shown they'll raise the Fed rate as high as they need to cool down the economy. How far will they have to go, though? They whack it up 1/4 point, the market hiccups for a couple of days, then just keeps chugging right along.
There would, of course be the serious drying up investment funds
This perhaps suggests another problem: what happens to all those 401k plans out there if the market receeds? Will people choose to draw their money out early (and take the penalty) if they think the slide will be severe? What happens to business if half their employees suddenly decide to cash in their retirement chips?
I agree with you that the government is better equipped to handle a "controlled recession" than back in the 30's. It better happen soon, though, before the economy get's so high we can't control the fall.
I'm sorry, I know I shouldn't be replying to this post, but I actually find it pretty funny. I've seen several other "What about the Children" posts on other topics; don't know if you can call this guy a troll or not, but it's amusing none the less. Best line:
She asked me if we can really be arrested just for loving people.
Dateline: NBC eat your heart out! Props to you AC!
My roommate likes to preach on about how the stock-market is going to crash hard, and usually I just ignore his rantings. However, two interesting items caught my eye in some magazine the other day:
;)
1. Buying stock on margin call's of 50% is now becoming common again. The last time margin calls were this high was right before the '29 crash.
2. The number of individual investors has gone way up over the past 10 years, thanks in large part to internet and day trading. Again, this is what happened right before '29.
My biggest fear about the stock market is not whether internet/technology stocks will go up or down, it's what happens to Joe Investor when they do. People who are not seasoned investors are now putting a significant portion of their money into stocks, internet or otherwise. What happens if tech stocks start to tank across the board? Old pro's will recognize this as a perhaps inevitable market correction. They may sell, or they may wait it out. Likely the experienced trader can afford to take a little hit to the bottom line, so they don't panic.
Joe Ameritrade, on the otherhand, see's all his lovely $80/share stocks suddenly hovering around $20/share. Perhaps he panics, figures he'd better sell everything while he can, and starts to drive the price even lower. A major hit to tech stocks would start to affect other industries as well, dragging the entire market down.
It's not hard for me to belive that a major, sustained downturn of internet/technology stocks would have a long-term, adverse affect on the market and our economy in general. We may not be talking 10 year depression, 30% unemployment, 30's style crises here, but for all of us dependent on information technology for jobs, times might be rough indeed. Brother, can you spare some bandwidth? Will code for food?
So what if a bunch of hard rockin millionares are getting ripped off?
I'm sure nobody really cares whether Metallica makes another million dollars or not, but that's not really the point. The point is that people are stealing music. It shouldn't matter if the music being stolen is Metallica's or my great-uncle Fred's. Just because someone is rich doesn't mean it's all right to steal from them, "because they can afford it"
The real problem here isn't why they compiled all sorts of lists of what individual folks had on their computers, but that they did.
When you log onto Napster, you open up a portion of your hard drive for the entire world to see. You can't expect privacy in a situation like that, anymore than you would if you suddenly decided to paint all your personal information on the side of your house. It's not as if Metallica hacked into anyone's system, and obtained a list of songs illegally. If your so worried about privacy, then don't log into Napster! You can't have it both ways.
Throughout these past couple months of Napster controversy, I've yet to see one truely convincing argument that would lead me to believe that downloading MP3's for free is anything but pure and simple theft. Yes, the record industry are a collective bunch of dumbasses for thinking they can turn back the hands of the MP3 clock. Yes, there are a large number of music groups out there making a sick amount of money off of $16 CD's that cost $1 to make. And yes, many have listened to music downloaded off of Napster and run right out to buy a CD they liked it so much; though I would argue that the number of people that have done that are vastly outnumbered by those who just want free music. None of this, however, can validate what Napster is: a software program that facilitates the illegal trade of copyrighted material. Whether this whole issue results in lower music prices, or even free music for all is irrelevant. The ends do not justify the means.
Can you say, slashdot effect? :)
I've not read about any such cases in the States, but recently there have been legal questions in Britain and France about whether an ISP is responsible for web page content that is posted on their servers. Obviously this case has no ramifications for cases outside the US, but if an "ISP responsible for content" suit hasn't already been brought to the courts in the US, it's probably only a matter of time. Any great leagal minds out there that can say whether this case would set any kind of precedent?
If Microsoft is broken up into some form of components that include OS division/Apps (read: Office) division, it is possible that nothing much would change. Your right: the two (theoretical) companies would not compete directly with each other. However, I believe that assuming a clean break-up (i.e., no back-door dealing between the two allowed), things would change for the better.
If Microsoft Apps is suddenly it's own company, free to do with it's products what it wants, what would be their first new product? That's right, Office for Linux. I'm guessing there are a lot of companies out there looking at various Linux distro's as a desktop replacement, and Office compatibility is one major hurdle. StarOffice and Corel Office each have a lot of good things going for them, but in my experience the Office compatibility isn't ready for prime time yet. Bringing Office to Linux would be a very attractive prospect for both businesses as Microsoft Apps.
Assuming a large number of companies do move to Linux on their employee's desktops, we could then expect to see a move to Linux in the homes as well. After all, if Joe User uses Linux 8 hours a day at work, he's probably going to want to have what he's used to at home as well. Maybe he notices that Linux doesn't crash as much as Windows, and let's him (finally) have 10 apps open at the same time. Also, perhaps by this time, we are starting to see more games for Linux as well. Granted, this wouldn't happen over night, but it's not unprecedented. The explosion of home computing can be at least partially credited to the explosion of business computing.
So, now we have Microsoft OS, losing a big foothold in the business world, and starting to see sales slip to home users. What do they need to do to stay competitive? Give the customer what they want: stability, security, a more robust operating environment, etc. Even if they wouldn't open source Windows, they would at least be forced to make a better Windows, or see their sales decline.
The end result? Competition. Competition between Microsoft OS and the various Linux distributors, and perhaps other OS's we haven't considered; competition between Office, StarOffice, and Corel Office; competition between makers of other types of applications, to see who can best support their now Linux-savvy userbase. And that's what this whole mess is all about: competition, or Microsoft's lack thereof.
Headphones would probably work fine, but when you consider everything else that's on the PDA (op system, apps, etc...), it probably doesn't leave much room for the MP3's. I just think that the company should consider marketing this toward the more professional, mobile users (put on a simple contact database?, Quicken type financial tracker?); instead of filling it with "toys".
YOPY stands for spirit of young & intelligent who want to speedy usage of multimedia function through PDA. The target market is young generation whose accustomed to mobile application.
(Marketing Speech Translator On)
Well, our focus groups tell us that people like small, shiny things with lots of colors and buttons. And the guys down in Networking are always talking about this Linux thing. Then, Brent came up with that great YOPY name, and bing-bang-bong Chief, we've got a product!
(Marketing Speech Translator Off)
Seriously, this looks pretty cool. My only question is why all these new handhelds coming out now think they have to have an MP3 player. Aside from the "Gee Whiz" factor, when would you ever seriously play MP3's on this? Limited memory, microscopic speakers: might as well buy a RIO.
But would AOL really want to distance itself from Windows that much? Even if a break-up were to occur, Windows 9x is still entrenched in A LOT of desktops out there, and a break of that domination would probably take months, if not years. I'm thinking that installing a new OS or buying a new "Internet Appliance" just to keep AOL would be fairly unattractive to many people.
You seem to be saying that all of the games which really require that level of graphic support aren't really your cup of tea, but for tens of thousands of people, it is precisely their cup of tea.
Well, yes, I'll admit that First Person Shooters, typically the graphic kings of the game world, aren't my favorite type of game. There is a certain thrill in running around Q3 like a madman, killing at will. But for the most part, I prefer a more strategy-filled game.
Starcraft does indeed have limited graphics, but you've got to remember that the game is approaching 3 years old. The fact that the game is still actively played by literally thousands of people, both on BattleNet and by themselves, I believe is testament to it's superior gameplay.
Anyway, the point I was trying to make was that game designers lately seem preoccupied with making their games prettier and flashier, rather than better. Take Force Commander, for example. Lucas Arts tried to put the RTS genera in a 3D environment, and failed miserably. The game is filled with 3D models and backgrounds, and you can rotate your camera to every concievable angle. These features, however, make it almost impossible to effectively issue orders to your units and follow the action. Camera control is a mess, the interface is clunky, and the actual gameplay unexciting. I've also been playing Star Trek: Armada, and while it is a far better game than Force Commander, it also sufferes from the same bad camera angles and tired, repetitive gameplay.
I've not had a chance to download the Earth 2150 demo to try it out, hopefully it will be good. I've also heard good things about HomeWorld and the upcoming Halo. And I guess bad games just come with the territory: there wouldn't be good games without bad ones. Still, it's frusterating to buy a game, get all the cool and neat graphic tricks in the world, and absolutely no play value.
Now seriously, I do believe our obsession with video cards has been a bit extreme lately
I had this problem a few months back. I used to have an ATI Rage Fury w/ 32RAM. It did the job pretty well, though I never bothered to benchmark it or check my FPS.
Anyway, I kept reading how hot the TNT2 cards were, and everyone was telling me that they blew everything away. So, being hardware geek I am, I went out and dropped $250 for one. Did it make a difference? Not an appreciable one that I could see. HL Team Fortress Classic seemed to run a little smoother, but for the most part, I couldn't tell any difference.
I managed to hold off on the Geforce cards, but now that the new voodoo's and geforces are coming out, the temptation will be pretty great. Still, it seems to me that the gaming industry needs to be careful not to sacrifice substance for style. Take Q3 and Unreal:Tournament, for example. Two of the best looking games ever, but is the gameplay really that impressive? Yeah, the single-player mode is not the focus of these games, as they're built for on-line play, but it's mostly just the "run and frag" variety, with a little Capture the Flag thrown in for good measure. I played the demo's for both of these, and by the time the actual games came out, I was back to playing Starcraft and Alpha Centauri. Let's hope that game designers don't forget to make good games in their quest for the most impressive looking environment.
Gold is not valuable.
I guess that's why it sells for $300 an ounce, huh? Probably not much use for it in electronics either (RAM, connectors, etc).
I guess I can understand the motivation for parents to want some sort of filtering software, though it seems to me simply educating your children about the internet is a better solution. The people to blame in situations like this are the people who make programs like Cybersitter, CyberPatrol, etc.., and perhaps AOL to a lesser extent.
Cybersitter doesn't advertise the fact that their filtering software may block perfectly acceptable sites, they just tell parents how good it is at blocking port. Likewise, AOL get's feedback from concerned parents, and gives them filtering software without mentioning the potential down-side. Internet newbie parents don't know what's really going on, and since they got filtering software to do their monitoring for them, they don't really bother to check it out.
Hopefully, if stories like these start getting picked up by places like CNET, which reaches a wider audience, people will realize what's really going on.
Yes, I would prefer they didn't report any cyberpatrol stories
Why? So the subject will go away, at least in this forum? What purpose would that serve, other than to further push an important topic out of the spotlight that deserves to be recognized?
Chill out with all this "We've already seen this" crap. Yes, this story is similar to the CyberPatrol stories. It's different (and important), however, because it involves AOL, which is, like it or not, a major force in the internet today. If 30 million (or whatever their subscriber base is now) people live with this for a period of time, they will see it as acceptable behaviour. And that is a situation that none of us wants.
If you don't want to read any more of these types of stories, then don't "Read More" and skip the post. I mean come on, how hard is that?
If no money is to be made then there will be no advancement...Privatization of space would lead to greater interest as space started making more money and this would inspire more people to space....
Your right, there IS money (heli-jack) to be made in space, if not right now then in the near future. Most asteroids are filled with precious minerals (gold, platnium, etc); space tourism will one day be a booming buisiness; zero-G research and manufacturing environments would be beneficial to many industries. The privatization of space will be like the privatization of the internet. Goverment will setup the ground work, such as space/moon/Mars stations, transport shuttles, etc... Once these are in place, and can be achieved at a relatively low cost, the corporate world will be all over it.