Nope, browsing is just an example of internet use, duh. And you're using the internet through their network, if you don't want to do that then don't use XBL.
No. People expect something else. It was never made clear from the onset that this is a different computer. People in general have no problem buying something that doesn't run windows apps when they don't expect it to, see iOS, see Android, see OSX.
That's because they choose to use those OSes, but when Linux was the choice nobody chose it. The problem is that there is no compelling reason for the average consumer to choose Linux over Windows.
Given that a large part of Mac OS X's very own core was derived from FreeBSD, that alone says something about the validity of an officially "certified" UNIX vs. the OS upon which it owes in large part its very existence. Hence, my reasoning for not taking Apple's "official" certification too seriously. Not to mention that FreeBSD itself is a direct descendent of the original AT&T UNIX, with certain parts rewritten purely to avoid copyright infringement lawsuits, but is it legally able to carry the UNIX name? Nope, because it would be pointless and simply not possible to throw cash around for the certification. And then when a new version is released... they'd have to pay up yet again just for the privilege to keep using the name.
Right, so again it's nothing to do with its technical capabilities - or maybe you just don't know enough about it - but about the face value appearance, which is the thing people who have no interest in the UNIX side of things care about.
Not sure exactly what you're getting at here.
That nobody care what it was originally designed for, they care what it is and what it can do. OS X is UNIX, we all know that but you seem hell bent on pretending that it's not just because it doesn't look like it.
Meanwhile? Up until recently you couldn't browse the net on your XBox360 at all, it's not as if they are suddenly charging for browsing, it's that they recently wrote a browser and added it to the already existing XBLG subscription.
XBLG has always been a paid service and they add new features to it, yes the XBox is a locked down platform, why is people are still only just realizing this? 40 million+ people don't care, some of those who don't like it choose PC gaming, those who don't want to pay for XBLG features but are happy with a locked down platform and what is offered by free PSN go with PS3, those who prefer PSN Plus over XBLG (or just Playstation over XBox) pay for PSN Plus on PS3 and a tiny number of people whinge that they can't have everything their way.
I want an xbox and i want it to be cheap and i want it to be free(dom) and open and i want them to provide the xbox live service and i want that to be free too! Seriously just get a PC!
I don't use "official" UNIX certification as any kind of proof whatsoever that something is UNIX or not.
Well it seems you don't really know what UNIX is at all anyway.
Apple took away the standard UNIX windowing system by default, requiring the user to install it themselves if they want anything even remotely resembling a UNIX GUI.
Ah so you only go by whether it looks like UNIX.
My point is, Mac OS X was designed with Mac users in mind above all else, not UNIX users.
And who cares? That doesn't change the fact that it's UNIX. Linux was originally designed for x86 PCs, not embedded ARM devices, supercomputers and servers...but look at what it's actually capable of.
Yeah yeah, more unfounded butt-hurt rhetoric. 'I still can't find anything wrong with their products even though i try really hard, so instead I'll just keep telling everybody that Apple customers are stupid and think they're cool.'
Nothing like being repeatedly sold fluffware (i.e. software designed for retards), being constantly treated like a brain-dead toddler
BAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA...oh holy fuck that's a good one, let me introduce you to Microsoft Windows, it's got big colorful tiles that make it easy to hit regardless of your spasticity, meanwhile I'll stick to UNIX thank you very much.
The only notable UNIX aspect that a normal user can see is the shell, and that's pushing it because the entire system is designed so that the typical Mac user never will likely never even see (or use) it.
So you're saying that because they've put a user-friendly face on UNIX - whilst not taking away anything - that somehow makes it not UNIX anymore? That's just an elitist attitude.
It's not that people don't want Linux, it's that they don't expect it or what is involved with using it. My cousin was one of those people who bought a Linux based netbook and then returned it because it couldn't run windows software. No other reason. It was perfectly functional, and he used it for several weeks before taking it back, but he wanted to run windows software and he expected that he could because he didn't know any better.
I'm not saying it isn't perfectly functional, but I'm saying - just like in the anecdote you've told - people don't want them. And 'not wanting them' includes not wanting all the things involved with them, part of which is exactly what you've outlined above. A lot of people do want Macs though.
It doesn't surprise me that your comment is just butt-hurt rhetoric. 'Oh I don't like that their product is successful but I know there's nothing objectively wrong with it so I'll call their customers stupid, that'll zing 'em!' and a quick hippy-esque 'They're slaves to the corporation maaan!'
The difference between the housing bubble and the desktop bubble is that at the bursting of the housing bubble people didn't go and live in caravans instead. The desktop bubble burst and people are moving to doing a great many of the things they previously used a computer for on devices like smartphones and tablets, even Apple has outwardly stated the iPad has cannibalized Mac sales, and they have the most profitable PC business in the industry. The MHz war was a big factor in the decline of the PC market in recent years, no argument about that but that decline is being spurred on by the fact that people can do most of their basic personal computing on smartphones and tablets. It's a combination of both elements.
worth adding that i predominantly use osx which has gotten significant market penetration thanks to it being a consistent, user-friendly and well-supported unix environment.
I suggest you go and find (it's not hard) and read some of the documents that have come out of the various trials the Microsoft has gone through over the years. They did actively sabotage attempts to get other Operating Systems factory installed by strong arming OEMs and threatening to raise the price of Windows if the vendor did not supply only Windows on their hardware.
yet there were still vendors that produced linux desktops, and still no one wanted them. best buy tried it too, no one wanted them. hp and dell tried it, no one wanted them. microsoft certainly had a go at linux, just as apple has a go at windows, but in the end there has always been consumer choice, and consumers did not choose desktop linux, these days fewer are even choosing windows, instead opting for android, ios or osx for their basic computing.
The old argument was that people that tried Linux didn't like it because it was too hard to install. Well, that problem goes away if it is pre-loaded, but see paragraph one for why that was not happening.
we've had live cds for a decade, stop making excuses.
Simple fact is, the Linux desktop IS good enough for people to use at home.
that isn't a fact at all, even if it were, "good enough" is not enough! windows phone is "good enough", webOS was "good enough" but they won't disrupt the market.
but for those that want to do the usual kind of work at home, email, web, IM, type a document, it's fine.
and "fine" is not enough, it's an alternative for alternative's sake. Android and iOS rose to significance over windows mobile and blackberry because they weren't just "me too" operating systems, they were different and innovative in ways consumers actually cared about, desktop linux is none of those things, that's why it languishes.
We can get $0-$10 games on our smartphones and tablets, but those are almost always 1-player games on a tiny screen. If this offers a cheap marketplace for console-style games, I think it's great.
But those games are cheap because the vast majority are just for killing time (like doodle jump or angry birds) - how many of them are the sort of game that you would sit down and actually play, i really can't think of many. Maybe Minecraft and Limbo - but then again they're on PC and xbox anyway.
Given a controller and the x86 version of Android couldn't you just play all its games on a PC - or even a phone or tablet which i suppose you could connect to your TV? Is there any proprietary software you know of on it that ties you to an ouya console and controller?
The biggest problem i see with it is that it won't get exclusivity, if you're developing for ouya you might as well develop for Android in general - even if you do need a controller - as your market is then WAY bigger.
Slashdot Mirror
You're confusing internet with web.
Nope, browsing is just an example of internet use, duh. And you're using the internet through their network, if you don't want to do that then don't use XBL.
You sell XBLG?
No. People expect something else. It was never made clear from the onset that this is a different computer. People in general have no problem buying something that doesn't run windows apps when they don't expect it to, see iOS, see Android, see OSX.
That's because they choose to use those OSes, but when Linux was the choice nobody chose it. The problem is that there is no compelling reason for the average consumer to choose Linux over Windows.
i'm not going to bother building a straw man for you to flame...
if all you can build is a strawman then obviously your argument has no merit.
you will ultimately think whatever i come up with that doesn't support your choice is wrong even if its not...
or perhaps i have a valid reason, but you don't want to believe that's possible.
Given that a large part of Mac OS X's very own core was derived from FreeBSD, that alone says something about the validity of an officially "certified" UNIX vs. the OS upon which it owes in large part its very existence. Hence, my reasoning for not taking Apple's "official" certification too seriously. Not to mention that FreeBSD itself is a direct descendent of the original AT&T UNIX, with certain parts rewritten purely to avoid copyright infringement lawsuits, but is it legally able to carry the UNIX name? Nope, because it would be pointless and simply not possible to throw cash around for the certification. And then when a new version is released... they'd have to pay up yet again just for the privilege to keep using the name.
Right, so again it's nothing to do with its technical capabilities - or maybe you just don't know enough about it - but about the face value appearance, which is the thing people who have no interest in the UNIX side of things care about.
Not sure exactly what you're getting at here.
That nobody care what it was originally designed for, they care what it is and what it can do. OS X is UNIX, we all know that but you seem hell bent on pretending that it's not just because it doesn't look like it.
XBLG has always been a paid service and they add new features to it, yes the XBox is a locked down platform, why is people are still only just realizing this? 40 million+ people don't care, some of those who don't like it choose PC gaming, those who don't want to pay for XBLG features but are happy with a locked down platform and what is offered by free PSN go with PS3, those who prefer PSN Plus over XBLG (or just Playstation over XBox) pay for PSN Plus on PS3 and a tiny number of people whinge that they can't have everything their way.
I want an xbox and i want it to be cheap and i want it to be free(dom) and open and i want them to provide the xbox live service and i want that to be free too! Seriously just get a PC!
Imagine if they charged you $5 per mouse click, how bad would that be!
One must own a Gold membership (about $5/month)
Holy crap! 5 whole dollars per month?!
I don't use "official" UNIX certification as any kind of proof whatsoever that something is UNIX or not.
Well it seems you don't really know what UNIX is at all anyway.
Apple took away the standard UNIX windowing system by default, requiring the user to install it themselves if they want anything even remotely resembling a UNIX GUI.
Ah so you only go by whether it looks like UNIX.
My point is, Mac OS X was designed with Mac users in mind above all else, not UNIX users.
And who cares? That doesn't change the fact that it's UNIX. Linux was originally designed for x86 PCs, not embedded ARM devices, supercomputers and servers...but look at what it's actually capable of.
Nothing like being repeatedly sold fluffware (i.e. software designed for retards), being constantly treated like a brain-dead toddler
BAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA...oh holy fuck that's a good one, let me introduce you to Microsoft Windows, it's got big colorful tiles that make it easy to hit regardless of your spasticity, meanwhile I'll stick to UNIX thank you very much.
I would call it an Apple/Mac environment.
And i would call it what it is, which is a certified UNIX system.
The only notable UNIX aspect that a normal user can see is the shell, and that's pushing it because the entire system is designed so that the typical Mac user never will likely never even see (or use) it.
So you're saying that because they've put a user-friendly face on UNIX - whilst not taking away anything - that somehow makes it not UNIX anymore? That's just an elitist attitude.
q: why spend $2000 on a laptop when you can get a different laptop with the same specs for $1000?
Well if you give me concrete examples i'll tell you exactly why. Hint: it's not the answer you gave.
It's not that people don't want Linux, it's that they don't expect it or what is involved with using it. My cousin was one of those people who bought a Linux based netbook and then returned it because it couldn't run windows software. No other reason. It was perfectly functional, and he used it for several weeks before taking it back, but he wanted to run windows software and he expected that he could because he didn't know any better.
I'm not saying it isn't perfectly functional, but I'm saying - just like in the anecdote you've told - people don't want them. And 'not wanting them' includes not wanting all the things involved with them, part of which is exactly what you've outlined above. A lot of people do want Macs though.
You realize the NDK is not Java?
It doesn't surprise me that your comment is just butt-hurt rhetoric. 'Oh I don't like that their product is successful but I know there's nothing objectively wrong with it so I'll call their customers stupid, that'll zing 'em!' and a quick hippy-esque 'They're slaves to the corporation maaan!'
The difference between the housing bubble and the desktop bubble is that at the bursting of the housing bubble people didn't go and live in caravans instead. The desktop bubble burst and people are moving to doing a great many of the things they previously used a computer for on devices like smartphones and tablets, even Apple has outwardly stated the iPad has cannibalized Mac sales, and they have the most profitable PC business in the industry. The MHz war was a big factor in the decline of the PC market in recent years, no argument about that but that decline is being spurred on by the fact that people can do most of their basic personal computing on smartphones and tablets. It's a combination of both elements.
worth adding that i predominantly use osx which has gotten significant market penetration thanks to it being a consistent, user-friendly and well-supported unix environment.
I suggest you go and find (it's not hard) and read some of the documents that have come out of the various trials the Microsoft has gone through over the years. They did actively sabotage attempts to get other Operating Systems factory installed by strong arming OEMs and threatening to raise the price of Windows if the vendor did not supply only Windows on their hardware.
yet there were still vendors that produced linux desktops, and still no one wanted them. best buy tried it too, no one wanted them. hp and dell tried it, no one wanted them. microsoft certainly had a go at linux, just as apple has a go at windows, but in the end there has always been consumer choice, and consumers did not choose desktop linux, these days fewer are even choosing windows, instead opting for android, ios or osx for their basic computing.
The old argument was that people that tried Linux didn't like it because it was too hard to install. Well, that problem goes away if it is pre-loaded, but see paragraph one for why that was not happening.
we've had live cds for a decade, stop making excuses.
Simple fact is, the Linux desktop IS good enough for people to use at home.
that isn't a fact at all, even if it were, "good enough" is not enough! windows phone is "good enough", webOS was "good enough" but they won't disrupt the market.
but for those that want to do the usual kind of work at home, email, web, IM, type a document, it's fine.
and "fine" is not enough, it's an alternative for alternative's sake. Android and iOS rose to significance over windows mobile and blackberry because they weren't just "me too" operating systems, they were different and innovative in ways consumers actually cared about, desktop linux is none of those things, that's why it languishes.
maybe, but in most cases you're better off with a NAS, especially since this thing would need external storage plugged in anyway.
Exclusivity only helps the console maker, not the game developer
Of course, and that's exactly what's needed, otherwise who will buy an Ouya? Why not buy another platform that has all those games and more.
yeah i suppose devs are unlikely to want to cross-compile for x86.
We can get $0-$10 games on our smartphones and tablets, but those are almost always 1-player games on a tiny screen. If this offers a cheap marketplace for console-style games, I think it's great.
But those games are cheap because the vast majority are just for killing time (like doodle jump or angry birds) - how many of them are the sort of game that you would sit down and actually play, i really can't think of many. Maybe Minecraft and Limbo - but then again they're on PC and xbox anyway.
Why would you want to do x86?
Anything that uses the NDK is going to be painfully slow when you have to emulate ARM. Most games will use the NDK.
Because if you have the x86 version of Android you wouldn't be emulating ARM - which is why i suggested that rather than the emulator.
Given a controller and the x86 version of Android couldn't you just play all its games on a PC - or even a phone or tablet which i suppose you could connect to your TV? Is there any proprietary software you know of on it that ties you to an ouya console and controller?
The biggest problem i see with it is that it won't get exclusivity, if you're developing for ouya you might as well develop for Android in general - even if you do need a controller - as your market is then WAY bigger.
I reckon a good amount of them will be bought just to be used as a cheap XBMC box.