addendum
My father is with rogers he called them to inquire about iphone4 (he's been with them for around 10 years now) they told him if he wanted it he had to fork the full price (650 for the 16) and guess what? Locked
you paid the phone 200$ and a 2 years contract (not just 200$). and it's not like you can just walk away from the contract. in the end you end up paying the phone full price (indirectly of course) so yes tou're intitled to an unlocked phone.
if I (or you) step in a store and want to buy the phone (full price) why shoudn't I (or you) get it unlocked?? here in canada it's almost impossible (unless you go to some shady small store) there's no way to buy an unlocked phone. you want one you have to go through a carrier even if it's the "full price" it locked to their network. and you have to fork 200$ it you want them to unlock it for you.
for instance tellus is offering the E72 at 349$ with no contract.. it is locked, on nokia.com it is sold for 349$ unlcoked!
all that asside (don't remember where exactly) I read that the iphone4 costs like ~250 to manufacture and is sold arour 700 (unlcoked from apple in canada)
High demand == high price. i.e. They can charge $50 or $60 because you people who need it now now NOW are stupid enough to pay it. Whereas a smart person like msyself simply waits for the "Greatest Hits" version at $20.
who are you includeing the the "you" and who are you calling "stupid" smart ass ???
High demand == hig price... b/c of scarcity not anything else!
AND ALSO you say pressing the discs is cheap, but that's Not the REAL cost of a game. I'd guess 95% of the cost is labor (programmers, artists, etc), and that's what you're paying for.
assming that is the case then it costs next to nothing to presse more discs and satisfy the demand of the market... thus the "scarcity" in this case is virtual.
So exaplin to me in which way that contradicts my post ???? explain please
high demand => high price for gold.. oil.. cake... hell even potatoes (true scarcity) to get a potato you need to wait a long time . but CDs DVDs, games ?? think it's an artificial one... as the marginal cost of pressing those things is very very low (relatively to the overall cost) what prevent theme from pressing enough to meet the demand at lower prices ?
You buy where you see value indeed. If you don't see value you don't buy. But if you find why not take.
The publisher can't lose what he didn't own to begin with (your money). And in the end you might end up buying the thing b/c you saw some value that you didn't see before.
that is your absolue right:)
I want one too (who wouldn't anyways). the comment was some kind of sarcasm. the app store policy is just shit.
they shotdown good apps and they let a lot of shitty application go through.
the CEO is not complaining about apple forcing THEME to use apple's api he's complaining about the fact that the new agreement will effectively push aside their product :
The new agreement added a clause which required that applications be originally written in Objective-C, C++ or JavaScript. As revMobile applications are originally written in revTalk, not in one of these languages, their policy changes effectively prohibit revMobile on the iPhone/iPad. The new clause also prohibits frameworks and compatibility layers, which also describes revMobile in its present form.
the key phrase here is "frameworks and compatibility layers" which apprently is the nature of revMobile (an interpreter of a sort)
The point develop you're own app, which is something you can't do elsewhere. Especially with Iphone, where you have to fork 99$/year to do anything (even if you don't want to sell/publish apps) -- jail-broken phones aside --
...including all those "bikini girl pictures FREE" apps which just clog up the pipes for no added value what so ever, i thought the android marketplace is completely open to any and all apps...
I don't understand, with the approval process (supposed to clean things up) in place how the hell such apps (and there are a lot of them) make it to the store ????
a lie? hardly,
said like this : "Everything that was ever said about Trident being necessary for the operating system to work was a lie. Simple as that."
I would rather call it an judgment error from the developers --or management--.
The rendering engine (Trident) and the application (IE) are tow different entities. While assuming that indeed key system component depends on the rendering engine --thus they had to ship it--, I fail to see the mandatory presence of IE (the application).
Mmm, Claud Shannon was an electrical eng to my knowledge and he was the one to lay down the foundation of Information theory (to my knowledge) is that concidered computer science?? IMHO computer science is built on top of that (like medecical science is built on top of biology)
Of course, if you want to continue that train of thought, the Wii is equally restrictive (can't even use text chat aside from pre-entered sentences in most games) yet has much larger sales. So, the secret to success is no unifying online presence (different ID for each game) and limited communication?
the most attracting thing on the wii was (still is???) price and the fun factor (for a group of people), no so much the quality of the games, let alone online gaming. Most people I know that own a wii have either an Xbox or a Ps3 on the side.
I agree, but I don't think that gives carte blanche to break them, especially if the terms are obvious. I can have sympathy on some people, but when it comes to cheating you should know you're doing something wrong and could be punished.
Reply to This
Indeed, but as my English teacher used to say.. it's not cheating that is forbidden, it is getting caught:)
the most reasonable/efficient way is to get around them simply say "I don't Agree" not to break them. that takes time and we live in a "Now" world.. or so it seams.
2) The idea is to not play whack-a-mole and have to ban a cheater 5 times, once for each game. It results in a better experience for the clean end-user.
cheating in one games doesn't mean cheating in an other game.
They can ban the PS3 it self.
Seems like a much more severe penalty than needed, especially if multiple players share a console. And, it would result in increased used consoles which have no online capabilities. Ban the player, not the terminal.
Agreed, it is too much, I was just pointing that the possibility exists.
Yet MS did that + other things to render the console it self useless (and that wasn't for in game cheaters, it was done to people who moded their box, some do it to play backups -- not paying for games --, some simply do it to get more out of their console, but that doesn't make a difference they are banned).
Right, PC games (usually) do it differently. That's not the issue here. We're comparing PS3 to XBox online service.
PC is a gaming platform with less control, an yet it is very successful (it is related come to think of it).
Regardless, MS charges for the online services they provide, one of which is maintaining a level playing field by globally banning cheaters. Many feel this is worth paying for, others don't.
Many are trapped too, since they owned an Xbox in the past, the logical evolution is an Xbox360. Or b/c they wanted XYZ exclusive game. As for ToS most people won't bother reading them and most of those people take them lightly or see them as just an annoying step to get what they want. (that is a very big problem in it's self, EFF web site has some nice reading in that regard)
On Live, if you get banned for violating their ToS (for example, hacking your box, cheating, sufficient complaints of racism) then you are banned from all online play. On the PS3, Sony does not (to my knowledge) participate in the ban process except for their own services. So, if you get banned from Home for racism you can still play all your other games online. Each game needs to ban you individually, thus fewer asshats will be banned for any particular game.
You do stupid stuff on home you get banned from home. you do stupid stuff on game X you get banned from game X. when you buy a console you don;t just own one game. banning simply from the service is not fair (not that I'm defending the cheaters here) especially if you're paying for that service and you don;t get a refund.
Even the cost itself helps here. If someone gets banned from PSN for cheating, they can just make another free account. If someone gets banned from XBL, they must pony up cash to create a new account, giving a monetary disincentive not to cheat.
They can ban the PS3 it self.
Plus a moderator of some kind is indeed needed --in extreme cases--. on some games players have the possibility to kick ban an other player given a sufficient number of votes, the game is self regulated. which prevent abuses (unless you're a on game with a lot of jerks, but statistically that's rare)
On an other unrelated note, forcing people to pay to play online is just plain wrong (not talking about World of warcraft, the games is designed that way). most shooters on PC you get at least the possibility to set up you own game server and invite friends without going through any service at all. a possibility that is taken away in the console world. and With PSN they're are adding premium to get more money but for added values you can opt-out from, at least the basic feature (among other things) of playing will remain free.
would you care to elaborate on PSN vs Live ??? Live has nothing more to give than PSN except the cost (I don't see the added value to justify that)
Frankly I fail to see a relation between the matter at hand and that.
Control will never stop anyone from doing what they wanted to do (good or bad) if they have the mind set.
Well, one simply shift the the burden to start (big fines in case of a bogus patent). Buffering of introducing delays (artificial or natural); we'll take the time we need to study the application no matter the workload we have, that should avoid a DoS like attack (login program is a good example, it waits a couple of seconds before showing the prompt after a failed login attempt). when a system like this one is in equilibrium there would be less and less bogus applications (IMHO).
Slashdot Mirror
where exactly did he say that apple should not fix??
addendum My father is with rogers he called them to inquire about iphone4 (he's been with them for around 10 years now) they told him if he wanted it he had to fork the full price (650 for the 16) and guess what? Locked
you paid the phone 200$ and a 2 years contract (not just 200$). and it's not like you can just walk away from the contract. in the end you end up paying the phone full price (indirectly of course) so yes tou're intitled to an unlocked phone. if I (or you) step in a store and want to buy the phone (full price) why shoudn't I (or you) get it unlocked?? here in canada it's almost impossible (unless you go to some shady small store) there's no way to buy an unlocked phone. you want one you have to go through a carrier even if it's the "full price" it locked to their network. and you have to fork 200$ it you want them to unlock it for you. for instance tellus is offering the E72 at 349$ with no contract .. it is locked, on nokia.com it is sold for 349$ unlcoked!
all that asside (don't remember where exactly) I read that the iphone4 costs like ~250 to manufacture and is sold arour 700 (unlcoked from apple in canada)
the version of mobile terminal on cydia isn't good ... go to their website and get the latest build it works ...
High demand == high price. i.e. They can charge $50 or $60 because you people who need it now now NOW are stupid enough to pay it. Whereas a smart person like msyself simply waits for the "Greatest Hits" version at $20.
who are you includeing the the "you" and who are you calling "stupid" smart ass ??? High demand == hig price ... b/c of scarcity not anything else!
AND ALSO you say pressing the discs is cheap, but that's Not the REAL cost of a game. I'd guess 95% of the cost is labor (programmers, artists, etc), and that's what you're paying for.
assming that is the case then it costs next to nothing to presse more discs and satisfy the demand of the market ... thus the "scarcity" in this case is virtual.
So exaplin to me in which way that contradicts my post ???? explain please
high demand => high price for gold .. oil .. cake ... hell even potatoes (true scarcity) to get a potato you need to wait a long time . but CDs DVDs, games ?? think it's an artificial one ... as the marginal cost of pressing those things is very very low (relatively to the overall cost) what prevent theme from pressing enough to meet the demand at lower prices ?
You buy where you see value indeed. If you don't see value you don't buy. But if you find why not take. The publisher can't lose what he didn't own to begin with (your money). And in the end you might end up buying the thing b/c you saw some value that you didn't see before.
that is your absolue right :)
I want one too (who wouldn't anyways). the comment was some kind of sarcasm. the app store policy is just shit.
they shotdown good apps and they let a lot of shitty application go through.
the CEO is not complaining about apple forcing THEME to use apple's api he's complaining about the fact that the new agreement will effectively push aside their product : The new agreement added a clause which required that applications be originally written in Objective-C, C++ or JavaScript. As revMobile applications are originally written in revTalk, not in one of these languages, their policy changes effectively prohibit revMobile on the iPhone/iPad. The new clause also prohibits frameworks and compatibility layers, which also describes revMobile in its present form. the key phrase here is "frameworks and compatibility layers" which apprently is the nature of revMobile (an interpreter of a sort)
The point develop you're own app, which is something you can't do elsewhere. Especially with Iphone, where you have to fork 99$/year to do anything (even if you don't want to sell/publish apps) -- jail-broken phones aside --
...including all those "bikini girl pictures FREE" apps which just clog up the pipes for no added value what so ever, i thought the android marketplace is completely open to any and all apps...
I don't understand, with the approval process (supposed to clean things up) in place how the hell such apps (and there are a lot of them) make it to the store ????
a lie? hardly, said like this : "Everything that was ever said about Trident being necessary for the operating system to work was a lie. Simple as that." I would rather call it an judgment error from the developers --or management--. The rendering engine (Trident) and the application (IE) are tow different entities. While assuming that indeed key system component depends on the rendering engine --thus they had to ship it--, I fail to see the mandatory presence of IE (the application).
to be truthfull The art of computer programing looks more like a math book that anything else ;)
Mmm, Claud Shannon was an electrical eng to my knowledge and he was the one to lay down the foundation of Information theory (to my knowledge) is that concidered computer science?? IMHO computer science is built on top of that (like medecical science is built on top of biology)
ever heard of TeX? or the Art of computer Programing?
that's exactly what I ment, thanx :)
rhose who ignore history are deemed to repeat it. or so they say ;)
ethics asside, didn't someone say that those who ignore history are deemed to repeat it ?
wait didn't that happen lately ??? with toyota ?
Of course, if you want to continue that train of thought, the Wii is equally restrictive (can't even use text chat aside from pre-entered sentences in most games) yet has much larger sales. So, the secret to success is no unifying online presence (different ID for each game) and limited communication?
the most attracting thing on the wii was (still is???) price and the fun factor (for a group of people), no so much the quality of the games, let alone online gaming. Most people I know that own a wii have either an Xbox or a Ps3 on the side.
I agree, but I don't think that gives carte blanche to break them, especially if the terms are obvious. I can have sympathy on some people, but when it comes to cheating you should know you're doing something wrong and could be punished. Reply to This
Indeed, but as my English teacher used to say .. it's not cheating that is forbidden, it is getting caught :)
the most reasonable/efficient way is to get around them simply say "I don't Agree" not to break them. that takes time and we live in a "Now" world .. or so it seams.
2) The idea is to not play whack-a-mole and have to ban a cheater 5 times, once for each game. It results in a better experience for the clean end-user.
cheating in one games doesn't mean cheating in an other game.
They can ban the PS3 it self.
Seems like a much more severe penalty than needed, especially if multiple players share a console. And, it would result in increased used consoles which have no online capabilities. Ban the player, not the terminal.
Agreed, it is too much, I was just pointing that the possibility exists.
Yet MS did that + other things to render the console it self useless (and that wasn't for in game cheaters, it was done to people who moded their box, some do it to play backups -- not paying for games --, some simply do it to get more out of their console, but that doesn't make a difference they are banned).
Right, PC games (usually) do it differently. That's not the issue here. We're comparing PS3 to XBox online service.
PC is a gaming platform with less control, an yet it is very successful (it is related come to think of it).
Regardless, MS charges for the online services they provide, one of which is maintaining a level playing field by globally banning cheaters. Many feel this is worth paying for, others don't.
Many are trapped too, since they owned an Xbox in the past, the logical evolution is an Xbox360. Or b/c they wanted XYZ exclusive game. As for ToS most people won't bother reading them and most of those people take them lightly or see them as just an annoying step to get what they want. (that is a very big problem in it's self, EFF web site has some nice reading in that regard)
Use whichever you prefer.
None, but I have a PS3 mainly for media caps :)
On Live, if you get banned for violating their ToS (for example, hacking your box, cheating, sufficient complaints of racism) then you are banned from all online play. On the PS3, Sony does not (to my knowledge) participate in the ban process except for their own services. So, if you get banned from Home for racism you can still play all your other games online. Each game needs to ban you individually, thus fewer asshats will be banned for any particular game.
You do stupid stuff on home you get banned from home. you do stupid stuff on game X you get banned from game X. when you buy a console you don;t just own one game. banning simply from the service is not fair (not that I'm defending the cheaters here) especially if you're paying for that service and you don;t get a refund.
Even the cost itself helps here. If someone gets banned from PSN for cheating, they can just make another free account. If someone gets banned from XBL, they must pony up cash to create a new account, giving a monetary disincentive not to cheat.
They can ban the PS3 it self.
Plus a moderator of some kind is indeed needed --in extreme cases--. on some games players have the possibility to kick ban an other player given a sufficient number of votes, the game is self regulated. which prevent abuses (unless you're a on game with a lot of jerks, but statistically that's rare)
On an other unrelated note, forcing people to pay to play online is just plain wrong (not talking about World of warcraft, the games is designed that way). most shooters on PC you get at least the possibility to set up you own game server and invite friends without going through any service at all. a possibility that is taken away in the console world. and With PSN they're are adding premium to get more money but for added values you can opt-out from, at least the basic feature (among other things) of playing will remain free.
would you care to elaborate on PSN vs Live ??? Live has nothing more to give than PSN except the cost (I don't see the added value to justify that) Frankly I fail to see a relation between the matter at hand and that. Control will never stop anyone from doing what they wanted to do (good or bad) if they have the mind set.
if you can't Discreet math is more suitable for programming. Differentials ans stuff like that is more for Electrical Eng ...
Well, one simply shift the the burden to start (big fines in case of a bogus patent). Buffering of introducing delays (artificial or natural); we'll take the time we need to study the application no matter the workload we have, that should avoid a DoS like attack (login program is a good example, it waits a couple of seconds before showing the prompt after a failed login attempt). when a system like this one is in equilibrium there would be less and less bogus applications (IMHO).