Do you think OSS will somehow prevent these people from being paid to develop these systems? If OSS can't do the tasks that these systems do, then of course people will be paid to create them.
Funny how this story links to "news.com.com", NOT "news.com".
Re:How many do you think Two Towers is going to wi
on
LoTR Takes 4 Oscars
·
· Score: 1
No, you're wrong. It's a stand alone movie and any failings withing that movie can (And will be critiqued).
If they wanted them to be critiqued as one, they should have released them as one. They didn't, so they are open to criticism. Once all three are released as a boxed set, then they can critique them as a whole but the whole point of critics is to discuss a movie so you can think about whether you want to see it or not.
If the plot was not clear to people without seeing all three or having read the books, then that would be a problem. I don't think that was the case, as I never read the books and I understood and enjoyed it.
I think that's a bit of a bold statement. Of all time? Do you really think Amelie will be remebered as the greatest romantic film of all time in 50 years?
Yeah, attack of the clones has a REAL BIG chance to win an Oscar, too...
In special effects, maybe.
Re:How many do you think Two Towers is going to wi
on
LoTR Takes 4 Oscars
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
obviously these critics have never read the trilogy for in the book there is no one central character.
Why do you have to read the books to critique the films? It would seem to be a failing in the movie, if you had to read the source material to understand it. That said, I've never read the books (beyond the Hobbit in elementary school) and I really enjoyed LOTR - thought it was great. Maybe I don't get every little thing, but I was never confused about the story. I never even got up to use the bathroom, and that's the mark of an entertaining movie as far as I'm concerned,especially if it's 3 hours plus.
It's ok for us to be elitist, we are much smarter afterall.
Well, you obviously have just as big an ego as a hollywood celeb, at least.;)
Re:How many do you think Two Towers is going to wi
on
LoTR Takes 4 Oscars
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Well, most of the people in the academy aren't celebrities. My college writing professor is in the academy, for example, and he is anything but a celebrity. He has a co-writing credit on one movie from the mid nineties, and that was enough toget him in. Lots of costume designers, sound editors and the like are also members. It's not all actors and directors.
I think the main problem with a movie like LOTR or SW winning is that people basically vote for what they like, and who they like. Most of the people in the academy probably aren't geeks, so SW and LOTR, while they probably liked them, didn't really grab them. Also, there is a huge impetus to vote for people who "deserve it" after a career... Like Denzel winning for Training Day when he didn't win for Philidelphia, Malcom X or Hurricane.
I think he means all tax dollars are wasted. Since a nickel is 5% of a dollar.
The math doesn't seem to be right, but I think that's what he means. Maybe he meant "If I had a nickel for every one of MY tax dollars that is wasted."... or maybe I'm just not good at math!
No risks, no innovation at all, huh? Games like Black & White & the Sims have been around for years, huh? I mean, aspects of them have been around, but those games took a very different approach to the god game. Other innovative things recently include Neverwinter Nights, the Tony Hawk games... Probably others that I forget. Hell, Freedom Force is the first superhero rpg I know of, though I guess RPGs are an established game genre.
Anyway, of COURSE we are getting newer and newer versions of the same games - because the technology gets better every year. It's the same reason we get similarly plotted big budget special effects movies year after year - the effects keep getting better. Once 3D technology plateaus, or at least gets to the point where it's as good as the naked eye can perceive, then they will stop rehashing the same games (to an extent).
Another reason, though, is people _want_ to play games of they type they are used to, and like. For example : FPS games. I buy a FPS about once every two months. Given my schedule, it takes that long to play through. Even though the games are pretty similar, I like to play through them, just like I like to watch movies that are ostensibly pretty similar. It's entertainment, and I happen to like playing FPS' for entertainment.
While I agree that it's hypocritical of the _same_ authors/editors to on one hand bash a companies practices, then hype their product, but why does everyone on Slashdot have to agree? There are what, two dozen authors? 500,000 readers?
I'd agree that it can be better to use CD-Rs (if it fits your situation), never said it wasn't - There is a time and a place for everything.
What I said was that it was crazy to waste the time and money on a "rubber band" solution. I think it's stupid to try and spend time and effort on developing your own automated system that it will end up costing you as much or more as a purchased one. Especially for the original poster, since he flat out states he has no engineering experience.
He should either get them done professionally, or buy a 10 disc burnstation. They aren't THAT expensive and you can quintuple the performance your $6 an hour drone gets, or even better, make it easy enough that an employee you already have can do it - no new employee at all. It would take someone about 30 minutes of their day to change the 10 disc burner 8 times. Why pay someone to sit there and burn cds if you already have an employee? Or hell, do it yourself. The money you save in ease of use and wages will pay off the burnstation in a few weeks/months.
(If the original poster is in a Uni environment, it might be worth it to get a student worker to do it, because, if student workers are anything like they were when I were in school, they are basically free labor and have a minimum amont of hours they must put in for their work-study, anyway.)
And furthermore, did you know that pressed CDs are more likely to fail and have errors than CDRs? I bet you didn't know that. Well now you do and it was a free as in beer tip from your bud Steve in Taiwan.
The place I go through error checks all CDs. They have a 10% either way margin of error on the size of your run because of this.
I've never had a CD fail on me, ever. Never had anyone complain to me, either. Or one of my associates mention any of their discs failing. All my cd's are audio, so maybe that makes a difference. I don't deal with software, can't much about that. When I worked at a CD store, I also don't recall anyone ever returning a CD because it didn't work. Once someone did return a alternative cd because it actually had opera on it, though.
And, if you think you break even on a stamped disk at 1000 pieces I don't think you know what you're talking about. That might have been true five years ago when CDRs cost more than a buck. But guess what . .
The thing is, I'm putting out music CDs. Not software. I can't have them be CD-Rs, because that looks cheap. They have to be silver backed, they have to have silkscreened faces. Think about it, you plunk down ten or twelve bucks for a cd, open it and it is a cd-r with one of those sticker labels - are you gonna think you got your money's worth? No.
I don't care if it costs me 20-30 cents extra to look professional (at 1000 the price dips down to about 0.60 per disc)- it HAS to. If looking professional means the difference between me selling out a run and only selling half, or me being able to charge $6 for something that looks shoddy and $10 for something that looks good, I'm gonna go with professional-looking. I'd imagine it is good to look professional in whatever business you're in, too, but maybe not - I don't know your business.
I also like going through a company because, well, I do not have a steady employee. I don't put out 5,000 cds every week. I put out 5,000 one month, 1,000 two months later, 2,000 a week after that. It's not steady. I can take my master to a place on monday and have my 5,000 cds by friday. I couldn't get that turnover with an employee burning them in my office, and I don't want to pay someone to sit around when I don't need them, or have expensive equipment (and 1,000s of blank CDs lying around to go along with the regular CDs). I also don't wanna have to hire someone just for a weeks worth of work, nor do I wanna deal with a temp who is just going to mess things up somehow.
For _me_, getting them done is the way to go. They also handle getting the lyric inserts printed, shrinkwrapping them, etc. That way I don't have to sit there and put the inserts in a few thousand CDs, then shrink wrap them, nor do I have to pay someone an hourly wage to do that. This changes the dynamic of your estimates BIG TIME. How much more would it cost me to pay someone to do this, and how much longer would it take? It already would take me longer to burn them than have them made.
If you can do CD-Rs, and you're doing small run or have plenty of time to wait around, I'd say a burnstation is they way to go. Building some sort of contraption seems like a recipe for disaster, and if it's not, please post details about the contraption you built and how much time/effort/money you spent building it, compared to how much it saves you and how much it would have cost you to just buy an off-the-shelf automation solution.
I'm putting out a cd by a friends band. I'm getting it done professionally on silver-backed CD-r (it's a cd-r, but looks just like a CD). I decided to go for cd-r because I'm only doing 500.
At 500 quantity, Furnace CD (furnacecd.com) will do them for $0.89 each. Less than $500 bucks! That's a hell of a lot cheaper than me trying to build some crazy machine with a conveyor belt. Best thing is, I can give them my master on CD-R and get my CDs in less than a week (3 day turnaround).
Now, if I was getting more done, it would make sense to get them done as pressed CDs. I don't know the price break down for those, but they said that it becomes cost effective to do that at around 1,000 copies, because there are up front fees they make you pay for setting up the pressing machines.
Get them done somewhere, don't waste time trying to "engineer" some solution with rubber bands and legos...
It's unlikely he got to see the movie without someone from Lucasfilm showing it to him. In fact, it's probably almost impossible, since ILM (owned by Lucas) is doing the Lion's share of effects. His comments about "spy stuff" are just him being dramatic.
Well, he was on set for LOTR, I believe, and for various Robert Rodriguez movies. I mean, they had pictures of him with RR, if I recall. So it's not _all_ hype. He also has been profiled in many industry magazines, it seems like if what you say was true, those stories about him would include the negative comments as well.
And don't say people were afraid to come out and say these negative things in public, because Premiere recently did an extremely negative piece on "Arnold" that made them catch flack from various studio heads, the Terminator himself and James Cameron. If they aren't scared of those people, they aren't scared of some web site guy, so why not reveal this stuff in print?
It seems really unlikely that he could just make up interviews with famous directors, because he could, and would be called on it. I think your "friends in the industry" are just people who don't like him, perhaps with good reason, perhaps not. But there are others in the industry who seem to like him okay, or at least enough to put up with him (maybe so they'll get better reviews).
What, you mean Inktomi, the company that lost the Yahoo contract to Google? Whose stock fell from close to $250 to less than $5 in less than two years? The company that was responsible for the Comcast-spys-on-it's-customers debacle of a few months back? The company that offers 8 products, but only two are search-related? The same company that registered a loss last year of $2.36 per share? And is on track to do worse this year, as their revenues are steadily declining? In fact, the same company that has NEVER RECORDED A PROFIT?
Doesn't sound like they are doing that well to me... Definitely not "excelling", as I stated above. Unless your definition of excel is "to slowly go out of business".
I wasn't commenting on the fact that he chooses not to use the service, rather on his statement "powerful commands and no ads... what a concept!"
This doesn't seem like much of a useful business concept to me, so I asked him to expound upon it.
For example, I could say "network TV and no ads... what a concept!" but I think it's fair to say this concept is flawed and wouldn't last long in the real world.
So what's the incentive to have their website open to the public, then? If that's their only revenue stream?
It seems to me like there is only room for one to really excel in the search engine licensing market... and Google seems to be the one doing it. Even Google has ads.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you think OSS will somehow prevent these people from being paid to develop these systems? If OSS can't do the tasks that these systems do, then of course people will be paid to create them.
Apple makes the lion's share of their money selling hardware. They are a very different company from MS.
Oh boy, that's pretty hysterical.
That's probably the most moronic naming choice I've ever heard. I stand corrected, I guess.
The first thing I thought of when I saw "news.com.com" was APRIL FOOLS HOAX!!
Funny how this story links to "news.com.com", NOT "news.com".
No, you're wrong. It's a stand alone movie and any failings withing that movie can (And will be critiqued).
If they wanted them to be critiqued as one, they should have released them as one. They didn't, so they are open to criticism. Once all three are released as a boxed set, then they can critique them as a whole but the whole point of critics is to discuss a movie so you can think about whether you want to see it or not.
If the plot was not clear to people without seeing all three or having read the books, then that would be a problem. I don't think that was the case, as I never read the books and I understood and enjoyed it.
I didn't say it would be, did I?
The greatest romantic film of all time
I think that's a bit of a bold statement. Of all time? Do you really think Amelie will be remebered as the greatest romantic film of all time in 50 years?
Yeah, attack of the clones has a REAL BIG chance to win an Oscar, too...
In special effects, maybe.
obviously these critics have never read the trilogy for in the book there is no one central character.
;)
Why do you have to read the books to critique the films? It would seem to be a failing in the movie, if you had to read the source material to understand it. That said, I've never read the books (beyond the Hobbit in elementary school) and I really enjoyed LOTR - thought it was great. Maybe I don't get every little thing, but I was never confused about the story. I never even got up to use the bathroom, and that's the mark of an entertaining movie as far as I'm concerned,especially if it's 3 hours plus.
It's ok for us to be elitist, we are much smarter afterall.
Well, you obviously have just as big an ego as a hollywood celeb, at least.
Well, most of the people in the academy aren't celebrities. My college writing professor is in the academy, for example, and he is anything but a celebrity. He has a co-writing credit on one movie from the mid nineties, and that was enough toget him in. Lots of costume designers, sound editors and the like are also members. It's not all actors and directors.
I think the main problem with a movie like LOTR or SW winning is that people basically vote for what they like, and who they like. Most of the people in the academy probably aren't geeks, so SW and LOTR, while they probably liked them, didn't really grab them. Also, there is a huge impetus to vote for people who "deserve it" after a career... Like Denzel winning for Training Day when he didn't win for Philidelphia, Malcom X or Hurricane.
I think he means all tax dollars are wasted. Since a nickel is 5% of a dollar.
The math doesn't seem to be right, but I think that's what he means. Maybe he meant "If I had a nickel for every one of MY tax dollars that is wasted."... or maybe I'm just not good at math!
Oh yeah! Wow, old school...
BUY games? What are you talking about? You mean, with money? People PAY for these things?
;)
Crazy.
No risks, no innovation at all, huh? Games like Black & White & the Sims have been around for years, huh? I mean, aspects of them have been around, but those games took a very different approach to the god game. Other innovative things recently include Neverwinter Nights, the Tony Hawk games... Probably others that I forget. Hell, Freedom Force is the first superhero rpg I know of, though I guess RPGs are an established game genre.
Anyway, of COURSE we are getting newer and newer versions of the same games - because the technology gets better every year. It's the same reason we get similarly plotted big budget special effects movies year after year - the effects keep getting better. Once 3D technology plateaus, or at least gets to the point where it's as good as the naked eye can perceive, then they will stop rehashing the same games (to an extent).
Another reason, though, is people _want_ to play games of they type they are used to, and like. For example : FPS games. I buy a FPS about once every two months. Given my schedule, it takes that long to play through. Even though the games are pretty similar, I like to play through them, just like I like to watch movies that are ostensibly pretty similar. It's entertainment, and I happen to like playing FPS' for entertainment.
While I agree that it's hypocritical of the _same_ authors/editors to on one hand bash a companies practices, then hype their product, but why does everyone on Slashdot have to agree? There are what, two dozen authors? 500,000 readers?
With those numbers, a consensus seems unlikely.
No problem! I know how it is.
How does hand silk-screening them work for you? Do you find you mess up many? Do you use waterbased inks or oil? It seems like it must be oil.
Now that they have the silver-backed cd-rs, it's something I've considered for small runs.
I'd agree that it can be better to use CD-Rs (if it fits your situation), never said it wasn't - There is a time and a place for everything.
What I said was that it was crazy to waste the time and money on a "rubber band" solution. I think it's stupid to try and spend time and effort on developing your own automated system that it will end up costing you as much or more as a purchased one. Especially for the original poster, since he flat out states he has no engineering experience.
He should either get them done professionally, or buy a 10 disc burnstation. They aren't THAT expensive and you can quintuple the performance your $6 an hour drone gets, or even better, make it easy enough that an employee you already have can do it - no new employee at all. It would take someone about 30 minutes of their day to change the 10 disc burner 8 times. Why pay someone to sit there and burn cds if you already have an employee? Or hell, do it yourself. The money you save in ease of use and wages will pay off the burnstation in a few weeks/months.
(If the original poster is in a Uni environment, it might be worth it to get a student worker to do it, because, if student workers are anything like they were when I were in school, they are basically free labor and have a minimum amont of hours they must put in for their work-study, anyway.)
And furthermore, did you know that pressed CDs are more likely to fail and have errors than CDRs? I bet you didn't know that. Well now you do and it was a free as in beer tip from your bud Steve in Taiwan.
The place I go through error checks all CDs. They have a 10% either way margin of error on the size of your run because of this.
I've never had a CD fail on me, ever. Never had anyone complain to me, either. Or one of my associates mention any of their discs failing. All my cd's are audio, so maybe that makes a difference. I don't deal with software, can't much about that. When I worked at a CD store, I also don't recall anyone ever returning a CD because it didn't work. Once someone did return a alternative cd because it actually had opera on it, though.
And, if you think you break even on a stamped disk at 1000 pieces I don't think you know what you're talking about. That might have been true five years ago when CDRs cost more than a buck. But guess what . .
The thing is, I'm putting out music CDs. Not software. I can't have them be CD-Rs, because that looks cheap. They have to be silver backed, they have to have silkscreened faces. Think about it, you plunk down ten or twelve bucks for a cd, open it and it is a cd-r with one of those sticker labels - are you gonna think you got your money's worth? No.
I don't care if it costs me 20-30 cents extra to look professional (at 1000 the price dips down to about 0.60 per disc)- it HAS to. If looking professional means the difference between me selling out a run and only selling half, or me being able to charge $6 for something that looks shoddy and $10 for something that looks good, I'm gonna go with professional-looking. I'd imagine it is good to look professional in whatever business you're in, too, but maybe not - I don't know your business.
I also like going through a company because, well, I do not have a steady employee. I don't put out 5,000 cds every week. I put out 5,000 one month, 1,000 two months later, 2,000 a week after that. It's not steady. I can take my master to a place on monday and have my 5,000 cds by friday. I couldn't get that turnover with an employee burning them in my office, and I don't want to pay someone to sit around when I don't need them, or have expensive equipment (and 1,000s of blank CDs lying around to go along with the regular CDs). I also don't wanna have to hire someone just for a weeks worth of work, nor do I wanna deal with a temp who is just going to mess things up somehow.
For _me_, getting them done is the way to go. They also handle getting the lyric inserts printed, shrinkwrapping them, etc. That way I don't have to sit there and put the inserts in a few thousand CDs, then shrink wrap them, nor do I have to pay someone an hourly wage to do that. This changes the dynamic of your estimates BIG TIME. How much more would it cost me to pay someone to do this, and how much longer would it take? It already would take me longer to burn them than have them made.
If you can do CD-Rs, and you're doing small run or have plenty of time to wait around, I'd say a burnstation is they way to go. Building some sort of contraption seems like a recipe for disaster, and if it's not, please post details about the contraption you built and how much time/effort/money you spent building it, compared to how much it saves you and how much it would have cost you to just buy an off-the-shelf automation solution.
I'm putting out a cd by a friends band. I'm getting it done professionally on silver-backed CD-r (it's a cd-r, but looks just like a CD). I decided to go for cd-r because I'm only doing 500.
At 500 quantity, Furnace CD (furnacecd.com) will do them for $0.89 each. Less than $500 bucks! That's a hell of a lot cheaper than me trying to build some crazy machine with a conveyor belt. Best thing is, I can give them my master on CD-R and get my CDs in less than a week (3 day turnaround).
Now, if I was getting more done, it would make sense to get them done as pressed CDs. I don't know the price break down for those, but they said that it becomes cost effective to do that at around 1,000 copies, because there are up front fees they make you pay for setting up the pressing machines.
Get them done somewhere, don't waste time trying to "engineer" some solution with rubber bands and legos...
Long lead times? Most places can do turnaround in a week on up to a thousand.
It's unlikely he got to see the movie without someone from Lucasfilm showing it to him. In fact, it's probably almost impossible, since ILM (owned by Lucas) is doing the Lion's share of effects. His comments about "spy stuff" are just him being dramatic.
Well, he was on set for LOTR, I believe, and for various Robert Rodriguez movies. I mean, they had pictures of him with RR, if I recall. So it's not _all_ hype. He also has been profiled in many industry magazines, it seems like if what you say was true, those stories about him would include the negative comments as well.
And don't say people were afraid to come out and say these negative things in public, because Premiere recently did an extremely negative piece on "Arnold" that made them catch flack from various studio heads, the Terminator himself and James Cameron. If they aren't scared of those people, they aren't scared of some web site guy, so why not reveal this stuff in print?
It seems really unlikely that he could just make up interviews with famous directors, because he could, and would be called on it. I think your "friends in the industry" are just people who don't like him, perhaps with good reason, perhaps not. But there are others in the industry who seem to like him okay, or at least enough to put up with him (maybe so they'll get better reviews).
What, you mean Inktomi, the company that lost the Yahoo contract to Google? Whose stock fell from close to $250 to less than $5 in less than two years? The company that was responsible for the Comcast-spys-on-it's-customers debacle of a few months back? The company that offers 8 products, but only two are search-related? The same company that registered a loss last year of $2.36 per share? And is on track to do worse this year, as their revenues are steadily declining? In fact, the same company that has NEVER RECORDED A PROFIT?
Doesn't sound like they are doing that well to me... Definitely not "excelling", as I stated above. Unless your definition of excel is "to slowly go out of business".
I wasn't commenting on the fact that he chooses not to use the service, rather on his statement "powerful commands and no ads... what a concept!"
This doesn't seem like much of a useful business concept to me, so I asked him to expound upon it.
For example, I could say "network TV and no ads... what a concept!" but I think it's fair to say this concept is flawed and wouldn't last long in the real world.
So what's the incentive to have their website open to the public, then? If that's their only revenue stream?
It seems to me like there is only room for one to really excel in the search engine licensing market... and Google seems to be the one doing it. Even Google has ads.