All I was saying was that the bulk of the features you listed that emacs should borrow from eclipse actually existed in emacs before eclipse existed.
As for ease of use, well, that's a matter of opinion. I find emacs easier to use than eclipse, but that's probably 50% due to already knowing how to use emacs, and not knowing how to use eclipse or the other graphical IDEs that it took it's style from, 10% from my desire to not move my hands off the keyboard while I code, and 40% from my habit of coding in a terminal editor over ssh instead of in a graphical environment. Your milage may vary (you proabaly like different stuff than me), however I would make the argument that nobody benefits if we take two different applications that appeal to two different types of users and make them the same. If emacs stays emacs, and eclipse stays eclipse, you can use what you like, I can use what I like and we can both be happy. If the emacs interface starts looking or acting like eclipse, or (less likely) the other way around, one of us may love it, but the other of us would be screwed.
Sometimes I use vi, because I just need to edit quick and don't want to load up emacs, or there may be some funky macro operation that I want that is easier in vi. I certainly don't think one should be made more like the other though. The right tool for the right job...
Click to go to instantiation? Fist, I guess we don't have to wonder what language you write in...
Second, who wants to click? Try Meta-. next time you're in emacs. (You do build etags, right?)
Underlining errors? Sure, or color them differently, or whatever you'd like. Works just fine.
The other thing about Eclipse is, what do you do when you want to edit something that isn't one of the limited things Eclipse has support for? Not all text files are code, and even the ones that are aren't always in a language Eclipse has support for.
One last thing.... Rectangle commands. End of story.:)
That should say: "Once you've dirven your hundreds of miles on the highway, and get off to drive on side streets again, driving should return to being your sole focus.
The Driver is supposed to operate the car safely. Period.
Before I say anything I'd like to say that for the most part I agree with you......but, there are many cases where a distraction actually helps you be safer. I'm not talking about when you're driving in a town or city, where making the right turns and stops is enough variation to keep you focused, but for long haul driving. If you're on a long, mostly straight highway for hours and hours, you need something to keep you from entering a relaxed state and to keep your mind active. If driving becomes boring, you become a worse driver than if you were doing something mildly distracting while you drive. Once you've driven your hundreds of miles on the highway, though, driving should return to being your sole focus.
Things that ARE dangerous are things like trying to operate a complex(ish) thing like a car stereo, GPS navigator, audio players etc. ...dealing with misbehaved children in the back seat...
The worst drivers by far are the ones that can't ignore a crying child in the back seat. You never hear complaining about that though, because it's trendy to hate cell phones, and it's taboo to say anything bad about mothers or children.
The fact of the matter is that most people who are bad drivers while talking on a cell phone are bad drivers when they're not too. (Usually because they don't care about what they're doing, so if they're not on the phone they'll be grooming, eating, racing, etc..) If you're driving recklessly, you should be removed from the road in a permanant fashion, regardless of the cause. Reckless driving is already illegal, and stupid sub-rules are just that: stupid.
All I know is that I could get where I was going better if I could shoot turtles at others on the highway....and if you could respawn three cars back when you drove off the edge of something...
Every single poster to slashdot is a copyright holder. Doesn't it seem to follow that we'd all have opinions on the matter?
Many of us create "Intellectual Property" for a living as well, so it's not like everybody here is talking out of their asses on the subject; especially since most people here aren't wealthy enough to lobby to have revenue legislated for them, and all we can do is sit on the sidelines and bitch when other orgainizations manage to pull off such things.
If self reflection reveals that you find no subject matter on which you can consider yourself expert enough to post authoritatively about, then fine, but don't assume that the rest of us are uninformed, inexperienced idiots that just like to rant for the hell of it too.
Right now, I just don't see how they can get it out along with good games by spring.
Most games run on multiple platforms. 80% of the games that come out for Xbox 360 between now and the PS3 launch will be PS3 launch titles. That's how.
Also, christmas time is hugely overrated for launcing consoles. Why? Because you get a huge rush to buy the next thing whenever you launch, and then another huge rush the first christmas. If you make them both occur at the same time, you're shooting yourself in the foot because you only get hype once. This is especially true if you can't provide enough supply to meet the demand.
Either way, look at the past dates that Sony and Nintendo have launched, and you should expect that both of them will release well before christmas.
It's a documentary. Do you really think the potential audience was that large in the first place? The people who want to see it will find a place to see it. When it doesn't sell that well, it won't be because it wasn't showing in every theater. It'll be because most people don't want to shell out $10 to see something that doesn't blow up or get them laid afterwards.
They've even had follow up stories from when the people who have done this on their > 120GB drives have had them die a few weeks (which *always* happens on the bigger drives) later write about it on their modding site.
When somebody gets this to work on a modern drive and it lasts longer than a month, it'll be news. When the latest drives were 1-2GB, the hard drive companies would have clear-topped drives in their trade show booths to show off the internals... Not anymore. Vibrations are such an issue in high capacity drives that if the rigidity of the case is reduced the drive eats itself in hours.
Also: I can see the disc scratching problems being caused by boxes being stacked too high in a warehouse, resulting in some crushing. Not only would that only break shipments to particular stores, but it wouldn't be Microsoft's fault.
It's not like the 360 is the first console to have disc scratching issues. (It is the only one of them that has a steel case around the optical drive though...)
It sounds like there were two batches, and that version two was already part of the first shipment.
I've heard stories from some stores that they've had no problems, and some that said every unit they sold was defective. That, to me, indicates that there are already a couple of revs out there, and that one is bad. It doesn't seem unlikely that any given store would get a batch of machines that are all the same revision in a single shipment.
That should be pleasing news to everybody who has managed to get one, and has one that works without disc scratching or crashes.
Wow, a whole thread coppied out of the old article
on
Rat Brains Fly Planes
·
· Score: 1
Creative. Must have given the plagerist a huge feeling of accomplishment to get those mod points.
How does selling your product for less than people are willing to pay help you maximize profits? It doesn't, which is why your logic is flawed.
Because populary in music follows social trends, and demand only exists for a limited period of time. You don't have the flexability of a long period of time over which to adjust your prices.
And you're not selling for less than people are willing to pay. You're selling for the best point on your demand curve. It could easily be calculated on the fly by the online store software. Remember, that the digital music demand curve has a point when you drop from lots of sales to practically none, instead of a smooth decline on the upwards side of the price scale due to the existance of online piracy.
Music has been priced too high for demand for a long time. You can tell because the industry publishes sales figures, and you can see the corresponding drop in sales for every price increase. They did it to themselves with CDs, and now they want to do it with digital music.
Let me help you understand why it's you that doesn't understand.
The demand curve for online music looks different for every song, and probably considerably different for indie music compared to mainstream music. These things could be calculated in real time by the online store software, but all the curves have one thing in common (most likely).
Demand steeply falls off at $1.01 as most users go to pirate the song instead.
For really popular songs (that you can hear on the radio all the time anyway) there will be a period of time druing which it will make sense to lower the price to draw more customers.
The argument put forth for variable pricing is that some songs are in low demand, so the price is potentially too high, some songs are in high demand, and the price is potentially too low.
And my argument is that that argument is wrong because there are other factors, including piracy, and band loyalty. This isn't about supply and demand. It's *only* about demand since supply and demand are the same when it comes to digital music, so your demand curve has to exploit the reasons and psychology of the demand (mathematically, not subjectively, of course). Go back and read my original post, and you'll see that is what I've been arguing this whole time, that finite supply economics don't apply here.
BTW, the part your leaving out (the reason why your demand curve is backwards) is that once you cross a certain threshold you lose 99% of your market to piracy. I would argue that the threshold is $1.01.
I don *not* assume that sales are instantanious, or that demand is infinite. I'd like you to explain to me how what I described didn't work out to be a high initial price followed by a steady decrease.
I was describing a demand curve. I just think you're wrong about the change in price. The price goes up, people download illegally instead. The price goes down, you're more likely to attract new customers...
Use a larger scale and it will make more sense. (Your argument is right in theory too)
If your original price is $1 and you lower the price by 10% to $0.90, but that causes a 15% increase in demand, you've actually made $350,000 more if you would have sold a million copies at the original price.
Congratulations. You just made the same argument I made, but convinced yourself you were disagreeing with me.
All except your last paragraph anyway, which is just wrong. When you have a dynamic electronic marketplace, you can change your prices in relation to a real time model based on actual data, rather than a theoretical model like you describe, and is used in traditional retail.
But determining that maximum is a non-trivial task and depends on the relative rates of change of the sales and profit as a function of price. Without other information we cannot tell, a priori, whether 99c is above or below the optimum. There are some rules of thumb as the poster above suggests. But in practice the way to find out is to try varying your price either way and assessing the market's response.
These are exactly the types of things that dynamic digital sales software should excel at. Small variations combined with real-time curve fitting in an online marketplace should be able to rapidly narrow in on the price that would generate the most revenue.
If this article were written by an economist instead of an economic journalist, it would probably have contained that insight. Of course, the guy is a crappy journalist too. Otherwise he would have realized that he should have solicited input from actual experts instead of pulling that entier article (void entirely of references and quotations) out of his ass. Usually I like Slate, but they should be ashamed of having published this shit.
Maybe it's time for the music industry to drop iTunes and find a proper online music store that is set up to maximize its profit, then the supplier and retailer will have the same goal.
If they did that they may have to come to the realization that in order to make the most money they may actually have to lower their prices. Since they're acting as if their real goal is to piss off and inconvienience their customers, and not to make money, I don't see this happening anytime soon.
Slashdot Mirror
All I was saying was that the bulk of the features you listed that emacs should borrow from eclipse actually existed in emacs before eclipse existed.
As for ease of use, well, that's a matter of opinion. I find emacs easier to use than eclipse, but that's probably 50% due to already knowing how to use emacs, and not knowing how to use eclipse or the other graphical IDEs that it took it's style from, 10% from my desire to not move my hands off the keyboard while I code, and 40% from my habit of coding in a terminal editor over ssh instead of in a graphical environment. Your milage may vary (you proabaly like different stuff than me), however I would make the argument that nobody benefits if we take two different applications that appeal to two different types of users and make them the same. If emacs stays emacs, and eclipse stays eclipse, you can use what you like, I can use what I like and we can both be happy. If the emacs interface starts looking or acting like eclipse, or (less likely) the other way around, one of us may love it, but the other of us would be screwed.
Sometimes I use vi, because I just need to edit quick and don't want to load up emacs, or there may be some funky macro operation that I want that is easier in vi. I certainly don't think one should be made more like the other though. The right tool for the right job...
Click to go to instantiation? Fist, I guess we don't have to wonder what language you write in...
:)
Second, who wants to click? Try Meta-. next time you're in emacs. (You do build etags, right?)
Underlining errors? Sure, or color them differently, or whatever you'd like. Works just fine.
The other thing about Eclipse is, what do you do when you want to edit something that isn't one of the limited things Eclipse has support for? Not all text files are code, and even the ones that are aren't always in a language Eclipse has support for.
One last thing.... Rectangle commands. End of story.
oops.
That should say: "Once you've dirven your hundreds of miles on the highway, and get off to drive on side streets again, driving should return to being your sole focus.
The Driver is supposed to operate the car safely. Period.
...but, there are many cases where a distraction actually helps you be safer. I'm not talking about when you're driving in a town or city, where making the right turns and stops is enough variation to keep you focused, but for long haul driving. If you're on a long, mostly straight highway for hours and hours, you need something to keep you from entering a relaxed state and to keep your mind active. If driving becomes boring, you become a worse driver than if you were doing something mildly distracting while you drive. Once you've driven your hundreds of miles on the highway, though, driving should return to being your sole focus.
Before I say anything I'd like to say that for the most part I agree with you...
Things that ARE dangerous are things like trying to operate a complex(ish) thing like a car stereo, GPS navigator, audio players etc.
...dealing with misbehaved children in the back seat...
The worst drivers by far are the ones that can't ignore a crying child in the back seat. You never hear complaining about that though, because it's trendy to hate cell phones, and it's taboo to say anything bad about mothers or children.
The fact of the matter is that most people who are bad drivers while talking on a cell phone are bad drivers when they're not too. (Usually because they don't care about what they're doing, so if they're not on the phone they'll be grooming, eating, racing, etc..) If you're driving recklessly, you should be removed from the road in a permanant fashion, regardless of the cause. Reckless driving is already illegal, and stupid sub-rules are just that: stupid.
All I know is that I could get where I was going better if I could shoot turtles at others on the highway. ...and if you could respawn three cars back when you drove off the edge of something...
Every single poster to slashdot is a copyright holder. Doesn't it seem to follow that we'd all have opinions on the matter?
Many of us create "Intellectual Property" for a living as well, so it's not like everybody here is talking out of their asses on the subject; especially since most people here aren't wealthy enough to lobby to have revenue legislated for them, and all we can do is sit on the sidelines and bitch when other orgainizations manage to pull off such things.
If self reflection reveals that you find no subject matter on which you can consider yourself expert enough to post authoritatively about, then fine, but don't assume that the rest of us are uninformed, inexperienced idiots that just like to rant for the hell of it too.
Right now, I just don't see how they can get it out along with good games by spring.
Most games run on multiple platforms. 80% of the games that come out for Xbox 360 between now and the PS3 launch will be PS3 launch titles. That's how.
Also, christmas time is hugely overrated for launcing consoles. Why? Because you get a huge rush to buy the next thing whenever you launch, and then another huge rush the first christmas. If you make them both occur at the same time, you're shooting yourself in the foot because you only get hype once. This is especially true if you can't provide enough supply to meet the demand.
Either way, look at the past dates that Sony and Nintendo have launched, and you should expect that both of them will release well before christmas.
But it'll limit it's potential audiences.
It's a documentary. Do you really think the potential audience was that large in the first place? The people who want to see it will find a place to see it. When it doesn't sell that well, it won't be because it wasn't showing in every theater. It'll be because most people don't want to shell out $10 to see something that doesn't blow up or get them laid afterwards.
Read the summary...
.83 cents.
Read your post...
Notice that they say the exact same thing...
$0.00829 *is*
They've even had follow up stories from when the people who have done this on their > 120GB drives have had them die a few weeks (which *always* happens on the bigger drives) later write about it on their modding site.
When somebody gets this to work on a modern drive and it lasts longer than a month, it'll be news. When the latest drives were 1-2GB, the hard drive companies would have clear-topped drives in their trade show booths to show off the internals... Not anymore. Vibrations are such an issue in high capacity drives that if the rigidity of the case is reduced the drive eats itself in hours.
Also: I can see the disc scratching problems being caused by boxes being stacked too high in a warehouse, resulting in some crushing. Not only would that only break shipments to particular stores, but it wouldn't be Microsoft's fault.
It's not like the 360 is the first console to have disc scratching issues. (It is the only one of them that has a steel case around the optical drive though...)
It sounds like there were two batches, and that version two was already part of the first shipment.
I've heard stories from some stores that they've had no problems, and some that said every unit they sold was defective. That, to me, indicates that there are already a couple of revs out there, and that one is bad. It doesn't seem unlikely that any given store would get a batch of machines that are all the same revision in a single shipment.
That should be pleasing news to everybody who has managed to get one, and has one that works without disc scratching or crashes.
Creative. Must have given the plagerist a huge feeling of accomplishment to get those mod points.
For what it's worth, the original was completely correct, and frames (mostly) died a quick death. Almost nobody uses them in new development anymore.
How does selling your product for less than people are willing to pay help you maximize profits? It doesn't, which is why your logic is flawed.
Because populary in music follows social trends, and demand only exists for a limited period of time. You don't have the flexability of a long period of time over which to adjust your prices.
And you're not selling for less than people are willing to pay. You're selling for the best point on your demand curve. It could easily be calculated on the fly by the online store software. Remember, that the digital music demand curve has a point when you drop from lots of sales to practically none, instead of a smooth decline on the upwards side of the price scale due to the existance of online piracy.
Music has been priced too high for demand for a long time. You can tell because the industry publishes sales figures, and you can see the corresponding drop in sales for every price increase. They did it to themselves with CDs, and now they want to do it with digital music.
Let me help you understand why it's you that doesn't understand.
The demand curve for online music looks different for every song, and probably considerably different for indie music compared to mainstream music. These things could be calculated in real time by the online store software, but all the curves have one thing in common (most likely).
Demand steeply falls off at $1.01 as most users go to pirate the song instead.
For really popular songs (that you can hear on the radio all the time anyway) there will be a period of time druing which it will make sense to lower the price to draw more customers.
The argument put forth for variable pricing is that some songs are in low demand, so the price is potentially too high, some songs are in high demand, and the price is potentially too low.
And my argument is that that argument is wrong because there are other factors, including piracy, and band loyalty. This isn't about supply and demand. It's *only* about demand since supply and demand are the same when it comes to digital music, so your demand curve has to exploit the reasons and psychology of the demand (mathematically, not subjectively, of course). Go back and read my original post, and you'll see that is what I've been arguing this whole time, that finite supply economics don't apply here.
BTW, the part your leaving out (the reason why your demand curve is backwards) is that once you cross a certain threshold you lose 99% of your market to piracy. I would argue that the threshold is $1.01.
I don *not* assume that sales are instantanious, or that demand is infinite. I'd like you to explain to me how what I described didn't work out to be a high initial price followed by a steady decrease.
You fail reading comrehension.
I was describing a demand curve. I just think you're wrong about the change in price. The price goes up, people download illegally instead. The price goes down, you're more likely to attract new customers...
Use a larger scale and it will make more sense. (Your argument is right in theory too)
If your original price is $1 and you lower the price by 10% to $0.90, but that causes a 15% increase in demand, you've actually made $350,000 more if you would have sold a million copies at the original price.
Did you read my whole post, or did you stop after the first paragraph?
Congratulations. You just made the same argument I made, but convinced yourself you were disagreeing with me.
All except your last paragraph anyway, which is just wrong. When you have a dynamic electronic marketplace, you can change your prices in relation to a real time model based on actual data, rather than a theoretical model like you describe, and is used in traditional retail.
You're buying into the spin.
Royalties are profit, not costs.
indie®
n : sombody who is a member of the officially licensed group of unaffiliated musicians and fans
adj : (of people) has ironically sold out
</joke>
But determining that maximum is a non-trivial task and depends on the relative rates of change of the sales and profit as a function of price. Without other information we cannot tell, a priori, whether 99c is above or below the optimum. There are some rules of thumb as the poster above suggests. But in practice the way to find out is to try varying your price either way and assessing the market's response.
These are exactly the types of things that dynamic digital sales software should excel at. Small variations combined with real-time curve fitting in an online marketplace should be able to rapidly narrow in on the price that would generate the most revenue.
If this article were written by an economist instead of an economic journalist, it would probably have contained that insight. Of course, the guy is a crappy journalist too. Otherwise he would have realized that he should have solicited input from actual experts instead of pulling that entier article (void entirely of references and quotations) out of his ass. Usually I like Slate, but they should be ashamed of having published this shit.
Maybe it's time for the music industry to drop iTunes and find a proper online music store that is set up to maximize its profit, then the supplier and retailer will have the same goal.
If they did that they may have to come to the realization that in order to make the most money they may actually have to lower their prices. Since they're acting as if their real goal is to piss off and inconvienience their customers, and not to make money, I don't see this happening anytime soon.