I was thinking about giving the vote it's due and casting a vote for Mickey Mouse. Then I considered that Disney would probably cheer the result, and have someone proxy vote for their verminous "property".
Internet denizens are another demographic that must be "sold" to a level equal to their voting power. Candidates are going to view the Internet population in the same way they deal with all voting blocs. This is not necessarily a bad thing, as this core group may have different values than the nation at large.
From reading the mission statement though, I am having trouble discerning which purpose holds the greater good: (1) giving potential candidates feedback about Web users' views; (2) allowing Web users to be consumers of political information.
It is a subtle difference, but I want to know whether yours is a site I go to for information and interaction with other information seekers, or to bitch directly to lawmakers and potential lawmakers? If you answer "both", do you see them as compatible?
If you traveled on a cruise ship, or stayed in a hotel, wouldn't you be pissed if there was no television? Maybe you would miss watching the news, catching a movie, or just vegging to some moldy old show.
Now imagine that the "television" is an interactive medium that you rely on for news, information, maps, human contact, etc. Not having that available would really suck. I respect someone who longs for the Net more than someone who misses the Boob Tube - it is far less "pathetic" IMO.
Notice that the majority of these legendary open source speakers are rather wealthy or at least very well off. This backs up some ideas of basic economics...
Why do people trade in MP3s? For a greater part, because Napster makes it free (like beer). Now this freedom comes with a price in time and effort. You have to go to the effort of downloading the songs, ensuring the rips sound good, and ensuring that there are no distorted or incomplete areas in the file. Additionally, you may consider the legal ramifications which can be viewed as an "expense" of risk and conscience. This can amount to quite a bit of effort, and for someone with considerable wealth, it is just not worth it.
Enter the record companies, marketers, distributors, artists, and middlemen. They have raised the price of a CD enormously over the last 10 years. Everyone with a brain in their head knows that the actual production costs associated with manufacturing CDs have dropped considerably. So the money now gets divided among more parties in greater slices than ever before.
Is it not obvious to them that the act of raising CD prices will naturally drive up the number of music pirates? That is the nature of the system, and not only do they (the bands and RIAA) largely oppose it, they largely create it.
One would hope that some crackerjack entertainment sector economists have worked it all out and figured out the ideal (realistic) selling price, and if so, they have set the price to be where it is today. I would suggest that a very simple market analysis will tell you that these current CD prices may maximize profit under the current market constraints, but they will also escalate piracy far beyond what it would be if the prices were lower. (aside: remember the old joke - if you laid all economists end-to-end, they still would not reach a decision).
That being said, I agree with everyone who says that MP3s help the music industry. It just stands to reason that as people's income rises above a certain threshold, it is no longer worth their time to collect illegal MP3s when they can simply buy the CD. If MP3s were legal, the companies would have less piracy to fight, and could charge a slightly lower price for CDs. This would in turn decrease the number of "free music" users in favor of conveniently buying the music since it would be more affordable. They would have to use some sort of copyright that would only allow not-for-profit distribution so as to keep their advantage (a form of open source?).
Moreover, a bunch of affluent guys (whether gods of open source or not) telling those less fortunate that they are doing wrong is ludicrous. A marginally-employed high school kid who listens to MP3s today will buy CDs (or whatever medium is popular at the time) tomorrow.
I cannot give you a whole lot of technical detail, but practical data I have. I have a SuperMicro S6DGU dual Xeon board on which I run two 500-MHz 512k units. I have compared these to a similar SuperMicro dual P3 board, and did some time comparisons in both SCO UNIX and in WinNT 4. In both cases, the Xeon was between 10 and 25% faster at the same clock/processor speed depending on the application.
At the time, I did not test multiprocessors, but I can only suppose that the margin would widen due to better SMP support within the Xeon/GX chipset. Also notable is the difference in chipsets between the BX and GX I tested with. The GX may make my setup a little faster with memory interleaving, more efficient bus arbitration, etc.
What remains to be seen is whether the cost difference justifies the performance difference for small servers, workstations, and hobbyist users. Can anyone kick in their deep technical knowledge of these chips?
I was going through the committee membership looking for those "firebrand of capitalism" names. I only saw a couple of names that I consider to severely jeopardize Napster's case. The membership is here. Is anyone else familiar enough with these House members (perhaps from your own state) to be able to comment specifically?
Yeah, I am probably reading something into the fact that they have a cert in the first place as equating to a "branding maneuver". I stated before that I am an MCSE, so I always look for the wolves among the sheep by reflex.;)
We can probably agree (and maybe Red Hat too) that they want to be perceived as the flagship distro of Linux.
The philosophy here is great, but trying to stand alone against the DMCA legions of darkness is quite unrealistic. You may need to fight by coalition, aligning your site with other sites in a "pre-WWI" style defensive alliance. If anyone's free speech is attacked, all must pool resources in response (perhaps by contract).
It is regrettable that such a "corporate" response is needed to protect free speech, but the modern Constitutional interpretation is basically a big fishing rodeo: whoever weighs in with the heaviest wallet wins.
But we need all those vendor-specific certs so that people can cover entire walls with meaningless certificates!;}
I have heard the same good things about Global Knowledge. A friend of mine took Cisco ACRC and said it absolutely rocked. Good setup, plentiful equipment, super-knowledgable instructor, good pacing, etc. Your comment convinces me they are trying to do something good in the area of tech training.
I guess in a way I agree with what you say about CompTIA stuff. Their exams cover things that are pitifully missing from a lot of people's skills, things that should really be assumed. Similarly, generalized exams for UNIX (or programming for that matter) might be handy. A strong structure is built from a strong foundation.
Certifications generally have an agenda other than the "insure-competent" considerations. They certainly do not make much money (if any at all) for the vendor. I assess current certs (not exhaustive; all IMHO) like this:
- Cisco: insure professional competency, proliferate technology through incentive discount. - Nortel/Bay: insure professional competency, keeping up with the Joneses. - Novell: insure professional competency, speed upgrade through "credential turnover". - Microsoft: proliferate technology, speed upgrade through "credential turnover", insure a modicum of professional competency. - CompTIA: insure modicum of professional competency.
I understand from this article...
- Red Hat: insure modicum of professional competency, add legitimacy to Linux, stamp RH name on Linux.
Is my understanding here flawed?
BTW, I am not trying to belittle any of these certs in particular as they are all a pain-in-the-butt academic exercise anyway. I am considering the RHCE based on what I am hearing. I am already an MCSE and have been for three years (I like money), so don't even think you can beat me at Minesweeper! Solitaire is kind of deterministic, so that was a pretty easy exam...
-L
Re:The grim, dark history of MP3
on
An MP3 Update
·
· Score: 1
Good insight. I am not flaming you, but here are my responses to your corrections:
- The RIAA opposed these things, but bands did not come forward individually to oppose them. A coalition may have showed some real resistance better than the modern "I'll fight you only when it hurts me not too" attitude. The RIAA is powerless without allies and lobbyists.
- My fault for not being clear, but I was not implying that the Grateful Dead opposed bootlegging. I was trying to contrast the speed of the fastest human music exchange network with the current Napster reach. Also, when I spoke of bootlegging, I was not referring to the GD specifically as they are the level-headed exception.
- Honestly did not know the last part, good info. I would never accuse the Grateful Dead in particular of being a**holes in the area of distribution versus art. They were the coolest ever in this arena. Too bad they never profited from their "business model":)
(1) so basically it is like most things in life - knowledge leads to monetary reward. Someone experienced in O/C'ing saves a buck because they are able to minimize or negate risks associated with an unskilled O/C'er "taking his chances". They get away with maximizing a processor; (2) more power like hot-rodders get from their cars. You can buy a leading edge processor, but it costs 4x as much, and maybe does not "feel" all that fast; (3) I will take your word for it. I hear people talking about polishing, grinding, etc. I understand the physics, but do not know the "tricks of the trade" nor do I own the specific equipment, the deficit to which is part of the barrier to entry; (4) I probably can be satisfied, but it is more out of ignorance of what my hardware really could do if pushed. I do like to hack and massage on the software side, and I do not presume that you can't do the same for hardware; (5) I have heard that. O/C legend says that your average Intel is 20%+ below capacity without much additional heat management. I have heard astronomical figures where good heat management is used; (5b) Intel 1GHz had the feel to me of being a total market bluff anyway to steal AMD's thunder. Good old FUD! (6) I definitely respect it as a hobby. I have friends who O/C everything they can on their machines, and they like it. I trust them enough to believe it makes a decent hobby.
The next version in this stepwise trojan refinement will automatically begin a Debian install after the Winblows files are deleted. Microsoft tactics hit the mainstream!
This is not really a flame per se, but a philosophical musing about overclocking. I am not technical enough on the topic to question your methods, so I am just pondering the motivations.
Overclocking has always seemed to me like the computer equivalent of base-jumping. People who do it either like the thrill or feeling of accomplishment (and some just plain have no idea what they are doing). To me, it has generally been rendered unnecessary by this combination of things:
(1) processor power increases frequently enough for my tastes; (2) I do not require more processor power for my usual tasks; (3) there is a significant learning curve involved with overclocking; (4) new processors cost money when ignorant people like me torch them; (5) I find no particular attraction in that area of hacking/optimization; (6) processors are one area of computing that are generally rock-solid. Since I run a few Winblows machines and a lot of *nix betas, extra BSODs or core dumps are not appealing to me.
So I am asking (not being a dick, honestly interested) why people overclock? What is the greatest attraction? All respondents, legitimate flames, etc welcome.
Of course you can lend the DVD, because the MPAA is not going to go after the grass-roots level consumer. Legality, whatever it actually is, gives way to reality. They know where their bread is buttered, and they certainly do not want to injure the guy who does buy the actual DVD.
Of course your friend who borrows it will be sued mercilessly, and will have a special "Region Code" tatooed on his ass as a punishment.
Am I missing something here? I see a lot of negative comments, but this seems like a good thing for Linux. It is one more server platform that, when viewed as a piece of the total server pie, gives people options.
Even if it does involve older hardware in some cases (as another post mentioned/accused), that extends the life of something that may lose its base of support otherwise.
-L
U.S., Bastion of Capitalism
on
Boo No More
·
· Score: 1
Probably not the bursting of the U.S. bubble. Here, we take Internet concepts that should never float, and somehow get the lame concept to thrive in the face of outlandish odds (usually inflated by an IPO which inspires a "moon obelisk" reaction). Just goes to show that the country that gave you PT Barnum still believes strongly in what he had to say.
Just the fact that you took the time to post this well-thought discussion gives me hope for/. People will probably flame you for saying the "M-word", but they should subscribe to the idea of "knowing their enemy" instead.
Was it not Al Capone who avoided years of real legal trouble and was proverbial teflon despite his known involvement in the mob? Until he was reeled in for tax evasion. Microsoft is a similar situation.
Whether they know the details or not, people are "aware" of Microsoft's business dealings and the way in which they ascended to the throne. Bill Gates who now champions himself a bastion of "innovation", is the same guy who privately beams with pride over destroying competition, wrangling shares of companies to influence their products, and creating distribution deals that are prohibitive to channel "sass".
What you see in general nowadays I believe to be the backlash of all the arrogance we have seen from Microsoft over the last decade or so. There are companies that behave a whole lot more monopolistically (Intel anyone?), but do so more quietly, leaving only boring market evidence of the fact. Since there is no "evil overlord" to put a face on, they do not draw the negative attention.
This is not to say that Microsoft is a scapegoat, but only the Al Capone of today. Certainly a legal argument can be assembled that makes the company seem utterly angelic, but the popular course is to penalize them for their hubris. If they do not get the screws put to them this time, it will eventually happen until they learn to duck the everyman's radar.
It does not seem that long ago that Number 9 was one of the best and brightest in the industry, with the 771 and Imagine 128. Now they are another casualty in the graphics adapter wars.
At least we can be thankful there are no dominators in this sector like Microsoft is to software. As someone mentioned, some new player dominates the industry for a short period, then loses it. But as Hercules illustrates, it can at least be cyclical, allowing the occasional comeback. It seems sad to say, but this is what real competition is like in a small highly-dedicated market.
This is potentially bad, but it would be far worse if some private organization had the same info in consolidated form. Governments tend to be incompetent, and that bodes well for your information not becoming a problem. Now if they are ever courted by big business to the degree the U.S. gov't is...
In the states, you can bet that this database would be accessible from any corporate Tom, Dick and Harry. Heck, the information that the U.S. credit bureaus (private) have on its citizens is staggering, and available to anyone you would make a big-ticket purchase from; do not fool yourself into believing it just goes back the mythical seven years either, as that is pure fiction.
Yes, I work for Microsoft. I work in the deep dark laboratory where they plot World Domination(TM) over the weak conspiracy-minded folks like you. In fact, I produced the product Active Soul Stealer(TM), and may use it against you.
How dare you act as if the console game industry is not about money. Microsoft brings big bucks to whatever it does whether you like it or not. Consolidating/abstracting hardware to a single API is a good idea whether Microsoft does it, or some open source regime that you sycophantically butt-sniff. If game companies of any sort adopt a porting philosophy, then that is the potential for revenue.
Now, AC loser, why don't you go back to your commune and bemoan the world of big capitalism in a country that does not give you the right to make a buck. I am so sick of pure socialists who live in a free country yet have nothing to do but bitch (and troll).
Slashdot Mirror
I was thinking about giving the vote it's due and casting a vote for Mickey Mouse. Then I considered that Disney would probably cheer the result, and have someone proxy vote for their verminous "property".
-L
Internet denizens are another demographic that must be "sold" to a level equal to their voting power. Candidates are going to view the Internet population in the same way they deal with all voting blocs. This is not necessarily a bad thing, as this core group may have different values than the nation at large.
From reading the mission statement though, I am having trouble discerning which purpose holds the greater good:
(1) giving potential candidates feedback about Web users' views;
(2) allowing Web users to be consumers of political information.
It is a subtle difference, but I want to know whether yours is a site I go to for information and interaction with other information seekers, or to bitch directly to lawmakers and potential lawmakers? If you answer "both", do you see them as compatible?
-L
If you traveled on a cruise ship, or stayed in a hotel, wouldn't you be pissed if there was no television? Maybe you would miss watching the news, catching a movie, or just vegging to some moldy old show.
Now imagine that the "television" is an interactive medium that you rely on for news, information, maps, human contact, etc. Not having that available would really suck. I respect someone who longs for the Net more than someone who misses the Boob Tube - it is far less "pathetic" IMO.
-L
Notice that the majority of these legendary open source speakers are rather wealthy or at least very well off. This backs up some ideas of basic economics...
Why do people trade in MP3s? For a greater part, because Napster makes it free (like beer). Now this freedom comes with a price in time and effort. You have to go to the effort of downloading the songs, ensuring the rips sound good, and ensuring that there are no distorted or incomplete areas in the file. Additionally, you may consider the legal ramifications which can be viewed as an "expense" of risk and conscience. This can amount to quite a bit of effort, and for someone with considerable wealth, it is just not worth it.
Enter the record companies, marketers, distributors, artists, and middlemen. They have raised the price of a CD enormously over the last 10 years. Everyone with a brain in their head knows that the actual production costs associated with manufacturing CDs have dropped considerably. So the money now gets divided among more parties in greater slices than ever before.
Is it not obvious to them that the act of raising CD prices will naturally drive up the number of music pirates? That is the nature of the system, and not only do they (the bands and RIAA) largely oppose it, they largely create it.
One would hope that some crackerjack entertainment sector economists have worked it all out and figured out the ideal (realistic) selling price, and if so, they have set the price to be where it is today. I would suggest that a very simple market analysis will tell you that these current CD prices may maximize profit under the current market constraints, but they will also escalate piracy far beyond what it would be if the prices were lower. (aside: remember the old joke - if you laid all economists end-to-end, they still would not reach a decision).
That being said, I agree with everyone who says that MP3s help the music industry. It just stands to reason that as people's income rises above a certain threshold, it is no longer worth their time to collect illegal MP3s when they can simply buy the CD. If MP3s were legal, the companies would have less piracy to fight, and could charge a slightly lower price for CDs. This would in turn decrease the number of "free music" users in favor of conveniently buying the music since it would be more affordable. They would have to use some sort of copyright that would only allow not-for-profit distribution so as to keep their advantage (a form of open source?).
Moreover, a bunch of affluent guys (whether gods of open source or not) telling those less fortunate that they are doing wrong is ludicrous. A marginally-employed high school kid who listens to MP3s today will buy CDs (or whatever medium is popular at the time) tomorrow.
-L
I cannot give you a whole lot of technical detail, but practical data I have. I have a SuperMicro S6DGU dual Xeon board on which I run two 500-MHz 512k units. I have compared these to a similar SuperMicro dual P3 board, and did some time comparisons in both SCO UNIX and in WinNT 4. In both cases, the Xeon was between 10 and 25% faster at the same clock/processor speed depending on the application.
At the time, I did not test multiprocessors, but I can only suppose that the margin would widen due to better SMP support within the Xeon/GX chipset. Also notable is the difference in chipsets between the BX and GX I tested with. The GX may make my setup a little faster with memory interleaving, more efficient bus arbitration, etc.
What remains to be seen is whether the cost difference justifies the performance difference for small servers, workstations, and hobbyist users. Can anyone kick in their deep technical knowledge of these chips?
-L
I was going through the committee membership looking for those "firebrand of capitalism" names. I only saw a couple of names that I consider to severely jeopardize Napster's case. The membership is here. Is anyone else familiar enough with these House members (perhaps from your own state) to be able to comment specifically?
-L
Yeah, I am probably reading something into the fact that they have a cert in the first place as equating to a "branding maneuver". I stated before that I am an MCSE, so I always look for the wolves among the sheep by reflex. ;)
We can probably agree (and maybe Red Hat too) that they want to be perceived as the flagship distro of Linux.
-L
The philosophy here is great, but trying to stand alone against the DMCA legions of darkness is quite unrealistic. You may need to fight by coalition, aligning your site with other sites in a "pre-WWI" style defensive alliance. If anyone's free speech is attacked, all must pool resources in response (perhaps by contract).
It is regrettable that such a "corporate" response is needed to protect free speech, but the modern Constitutional interpretation is basically a big fishing rodeo: whoever weighs in with the heaviest wallet wins.
-L
The essential classes:
666: Windows Reboot Options 714: The Kernel Debugger and You
-L
But we need all those vendor-specific certs so that people can cover entire walls with meaningless certificates! ;}
I have heard the same good things about Global Knowledge. A friend of mine took Cisco ACRC and said it absolutely rocked. Good setup, plentiful equipment, super-knowledgable instructor, good pacing, etc. Your comment convinces me they are trying to do something good in the area of tech training.
I guess in a way I agree with what you say about CompTIA stuff. Their exams cover things that are pitifully missing from a lot of people's skills, things that should really be assumed. Similarly, generalized exams for UNIX (or programming for that matter) might be handy. A strong structure is built from a strong foundation.
-L
Certifications generally have an agenda other than the "insure-competent" considerations. They certainly do not make much money (if any at all) for the vendor. I assess current certs (not exhaustive; all IMHO) like this:
- Cisco: insure professional competency, proliferate technology through incentive discount.
- Nortel/Bay: insure professional competency, keeping up with the Joneses.
- Novell: insure professional competency, speed upgrade through "credential turnover".
- Microsoft: proliferate technology, speed upgrade through "credential turnover", insure a modicum of professional competency.
- CompTIA: insure modicum of professional competency.
I understand from this article...
- Red Hat: insure modicum of professional competency, add legitimacy to Linux, stamp RH name on Linux.
Is my understanding here flawed?
BTW, I am not trying to belittle any of these certs in particular as they are all a pain-in-the-butt academic exercise anyway. I am considering the RHCE based on what I am hearing. I am already an MCSE and have been for three years (I like money), so don't even think you can beat me at Minesweeper! Solitaire is kind of deterministic, so that was a pretty easy exam...
-L
Good insight. I am not flaming you, but here are my responses to your corrections:
:)
- The RIAA opposed these things, but bands did not come forward individually to oppose them. A coalition may have showed some real resistance better than the modern "I'll fight you only when it hurts me not too" attitude. The RIAA is powerless without allies and lobbyists.
- My fault for not being clear, but I was not implying that the Grateful Dead opposed bootlegging. I was trying to contrast the speed of the fastest human music exchange network with the current Napster reach. Also, when I spoke of bootlegging, I was not referring to the GD specifically as they are the level-headed exception.
- Honestly did not know the last part, good info. I would never accuse the Grateful Dead in particular of being a**holes in the area of distribution versus art. They were the coolest ever in this arena. Too bad they never profited from their "business model"
-L
Intel will now say:
"Only a real prick uses Duron"
-L
Good insight, thanks.
(1) so basically it is like most things in life - knowledge leads to monetary reward. Someone experienced in O/C'ing saves a buck because they are able to minimize or negate risks associated with an unskilled O/C'er "taking his chances". They get away with maximizing a processor;
(2) more power like hot-rodders get from their cars. You can buy a leading edge processor, but it costs 4x as much, and maybe does not "feel" all that fast;
(3) I will take your word for it. I hear people talking about polishing, grinding, etc. I understand the physics, but do not know the "tricks of the trade" nor do I own the specific equipment, the deficit to which is part of the barrier to entry;
(4) I probably can be satisfied, but it is more out of ignorance of what my hardware really could do if pushed. I do like to hack and massage on the software side, and I do not presume that you can't do the same for hardware;
(5) I have heard that. O/C legend says that your average Intel is 20%+ below capacity without much additional heat management. I have heard astronomical figures where good heat management is used;
(5b) Intel 1GHz had the feel to me of being a total market bluff anyway to steal AMD's thunder. Good old FUD!
(6) I definitely respect it as a hobby. I have friends who O/C everything they can on their machines, and they like it. I trust them enough to believe it makes a decent hobby.
-L
The next version in this stepwise trojan refinement will automatically begin a Debian install after the Winblows files are deleted. Microsoft tactics hit the mainstream!
-L
This is not really a flame per se, but a philosophical musing about overclocking. I am not technical enough on the topic to question your methods, so I am just pondering the motivations.
Overclocking has always seemed to me like the computer equivalent of base-jumping. People who do it either like the thrill or feeling of accomplishment (and some just plain have no idea what they are doing). To me, it has generally been rendered unnecessary by this combination of things:
(1) processor power increases frequently enough for my tastes;
(2) I do not require more processor power for my usual tasks;
(3) there is a significant learning curve involved with overclocking;
(4) new processors cost money when ignorant people like me torch them;
(5) I find no particular attraction in that area of hacking/optimization;
(6) processors are one area of computing that are generally rock-solid. Since I run a few Winblows machines and a lot of *nix betas, extra BSODs or core dumps are not appealing to me.
So I am asking (not being a dick, honestly interested) why people overclock? What is the greatest attraction? All respondents, legitimate flames, etc welcome.
-L
You don't suppose they could "embrace and extend" the law do you? It would really suck to need a Microsoft lawyer to be able to defend yourself...
-L
Of course you can lend the DVD, because the MPAA is not going to go after the grass-roots level consumer. Legality, whatever it actually is, gives way to reality. They know where their bread is buttered, and they certainly do not want to injure the guy who does buy the actual DVD.
Of course your friend who borrows it will be sued mercilessly, and will have a special "Region Code" tatooed on his ass as a punishment.
-L
Am I missing something here? I see a lot of negative comments, but this seems like a good thing for Linux. It is one more server platform that, when viewed as a piece of the total server pie, gives people options.
Even if it does involve older hardware in some cases (as another post mentioned/accused), that extends the life of something that may lose its base of support otherwise.
-L
Probably not the bursting of the U.S. bubble. Here, we take Internet concepts that should never float, and somehow get the lame concept to thrive in the face of outlandish odds (usually inflated by an IPO which inspires a "moon obelisk" reaction). Just goes to show that the country that gave you PT Barnum still believes strongly in what he had to say.
-L
Just the fact that you took the time to post this well-thought discussion gives me hope for /. People will probably flame you for saying the "M-word", but they should subscribe to the idea of "knowing their enemy" instead.
Was it not Al Capone who avoided years of real legal trouble and was proverbial teflon despite his known involvement in the mob? Until he was reeled in for tax evasion. Microsoft is a similar situation.
Whether they know the details or not, people are "aware" of Microsoft's business dealings and the way in which they ascended to the throne. Bill Gates who now champions himself a bastion of "innovation", is the same guy who privately beams with pride over destroying competition, wrangling shares of companies to influence their products, and creating distribution deals that are prohibitive to channel "sass".
What you see in general nowadays I believe to be the backlash of all the arrogance we have seen from Microsoft over the last decade or so. There are companies that behave a whole lot more monopolistically (Intel anyone?), but do so more quietly, leaving only boring market evidence of the fact. Since there is no "evil overlord" to put a face on, they do not draw the negative attention.
This is not to say that Microsoft is a scapegoat, but only the Al Capone of today. Certainly a legal argument can be assembled that makes the company seem utterly angelic, but the popular course is to penalize them for their hubris. If they do not get the screws put to them this time, it will eventually happen until they learn to duck the everyman's radar.
Just my two cents.
-L
It does not seem that long ago that Number 9 was one of the best and brightest in the industry, with the 771 and Imagine 128. Now they are another casualty in the graphics adapter wars.
At least we can be thankful there are no dominators in this sector like Microsoft is to software. As someone mentioned, some new player dominates the industry for a short period, then loses it. But as Hercules illustrates, it can at least be cyclical, allowing the occasional comeback. It seems sad to say, but this is what real competition is like in a small highly-dedicated market.
-L
The code is out there...
This is potentially bad, but it would be far worse if some private organization had the same info in consolidated form. Governments tend to be incompetent, and that bodes well for your information not becoming a problem. Now if they are ever courted by big business to the degree the U.S. gov't is...
In the states, you can bet that this database would be accessible from any corporate Tom, Dick and Harry. Heck, the information that the U.S. credit bureaus (private) have on its citizens is staggering, and available to anyone you would make a big-ticket purchase from; do not fool yourself into believing it just goes back the mythical seven years either, as that is pure fiction.
-L
Yes, I work for Microsoft. I work in the deep dark laboratory where they plot World Domination(TM) over the weak conspiracy-minded folks like you. In fact, I produced the product Active Soul Stealer(TM), and may use it against you.
How dare you act as if the console game industry is not about money. Microsoft brings big bucks to whatever it does whether you like it or not. Consolidating/abstracting hardware to a single API is a good idea whether Microsoft does it, or some open source regime that you sycophantically butt-sniff. If game companies of any sort adopt a porting philosophy, then that is the potential for revenue.
Now, AC loser, why don't you go back to your commune and bemoan the world of big capitalism in a country that does not give you the right to make a buck. I am so sick of pure socialists who live in a free country yet have nothing to do but bitch (and troll).
-L