I know some people are chomping on the bit, here, but the problem isn't at all due to MS. It has to do more with software developers who are convinced that their product is marketable as standalone. See: antivirus vendors, browser makers, entertainment apps, etc.
When you get a car, there are certain assumptions that are definite. It's going to have an engine. It's going to have windshield wipers. However, the difference between these two things is that windshield wipers came much later, AFTER other people made businesses in enabling people to "see while it's raining". At some point, a secondary technology becomes so invaluable that you can't imagine the first existing without including it. Find me an OS, any OS today, that doesn't include a browser of some kind (whether it be free, Free, or monopoly).
Somewhere along the line McAffe and, to a lesser extent, Symantec, should have realized you can't have your business rely solely on fundamental flaws in other products. You're relying on their business model, then, and if they fix it you're sunk.
If MS closes the gaps better, they're screwed. If they include their own antivirus program, they're screwed. No matter what way you slice it, MS is actually doing the "right thing". Those doing "the wrong thing" decided their fate years ago.
Why doesn't he go for Colt 45? He's already got the spokesman. "Lando Calrissian here for Colt 45. The galaxy's FINEST malt liquor beverage." (from a Who's Line Is It Anyway sketch).
If Sony does this (somehow I doubt it, although a drop to $150 wouldn't be unexpected), MS has got to drop. Imagine picking up what's essentially a computer in a box for $99.
To be honest, as a geek, Xbox has become my favorite plaything. The games have started to get very good (I've been playing Panzer Dragoon and Voodoo Vince pretty much non-stop) and, when you're ready to hack the system, all the parts are there. I actually have two: one legitimate one I use on Xbox Live and another I've sacrificed for hacking. Hard drive, Intel processor, networking, nice video: card all for $100? I'll pick up another.:)
Re:when computers "disappear" ...
on
Telecosm
·
· Score: 2
When they become the "communicators" of Star Trek by automatically routing your messages, then they will have become true communications devices.
And as Larry Niven put it in "Ringworld", we'll never be alone ever again.
It burned my soul that people would settle for a second rate solution just because they knew of no other, which they could not learn of due to Microsoft's tying deals and manipulation of the network effects.
What is this? Programming or religious vendetta? They are a company you don't like -- so what? It's only a computer operating system. People are not dying because they get Windows on their machines, any more than they get a particular engine with their new Toyota.
This is the right idea for AOL. Clearly they need a device that already has in-roads into a majority of computer-savvy homes (if not now with the PS2, when more are sold). But it's clearly the wrong market.
The right market would have been GameCube.
The demographics for Playstation are older males, savvy about AOL's "features", who may occasionally use Instant Messenger. The demographics for GameCube are young males (and females) are actual fanatics of the "real" AOL (subscribers) who aren't willing to investigate any of AOL's privacy/tracking "features".
I would hedge my bet, also, that the AOL package will pretty much require the hard drive (and the ethernet card/modem) which is going to make this an expensive upgrade for some. Sony is in a pickle that they couldn't get both pieces of the hardware in the basic set (as Microsoft is doing -- we'll see how well that pans out). But they will probably have to offset the purchase with rebates which will require -- you guessed it -- long-term subscriptions to AOL.
No matter what way you slice it, AOL wins in some capacity. They should have gone for GameCube though for the kill.
sorry, but IMHO fattening up one's high school portfolio just to get into a prestigious college is just pathetic. no freakin kid of mine is gonna be an overachiever. children should be taught to do what they enjoy, to find pleasure and meaning in activities. jumping through hoops in school makes for a dull life of more hoops jumping when we become adults, hence dispicable career-obsessed yuppies with not a shred of human dignity left in them.
You're going to be sorry when "your freakin kid" ends up at a community college, with a lower salary later on, and no innitative to try new things, when you didn't push him in school to try out many different activities. How can he/she find out "what they enjoy" when they aren't pushed to try new things? Sitting at home playing Nintendo doesn't count.
You're all missing the point. A majority of the top students in my high school (including myself) tried to diversify their portfolio of activities to look better for colleges.
When a student is getting A's and B's, they are pushed to take on as many extracurricular activities as they can to show that "they are well-rounded". It supposedly helps get them into better schools.
For example, in addition to AP courses, I was an editor for the school's literary magazine, wrote for the newspaper, played ice hockey, did academic decathelon, and other stuff.
My girlfriend (she was validictorian of her class -- I was saluditorian one year before) was the captain of her tennis team, leader of SADD, a writer for the literary magazine, editor for the school's newspaper, etc.
I grew up in Jersey. My school district had a "Gifted and Talented" program, which I attended through elementary school. The high school had a good deal of AP courses (Rutherford) which I took. I was saluditorian by the time I was done.
There was occasionally a brilliant student that would get special attention (an 8th-grade student got to attend high school alegbra, for example) and they were many programs for certain niches of people, including the "smart kids", but this 2% thing is completely hogwash.
A compadre of mine got 1590 on her SATs, took every AP course the school offered, and was my competitor in every way, form, and fashion. My girlfriend was validictorian of her class (one year below me), scored something close to perfect on the verbal section of the SATs (I think her total score was above 1500) and was captain of the tennis team to boot.
We were also good friends. If either had been invited to any "special program" for the top 2%, I would've known about it.
From his other accomplishments (tae kwon do, violin, ribbons from various events) mentioned in the article, he doesn't seem like someone who'd be getting C's and D's.
For someone who has recently considered suicide (myself), this story is a bit harrowing. I keep reading about parents who have to deal with their sons and daughters dying, and it's about the only reason that's keeping me from doing it.
In regards to this particular situation, this continues to underline the problems of "quiet children" which (I think) have recently come to light but have been brewing for years. That said, the young man probably had an inclination to commit suicide way before this: from what I've read, most people seem to think about it well beforehand.
And I agree with what someone else said: 10 days of suspension seems extremely rough. If this kid was actively trying to change grades (the article doesn't say) I would think a schoolweek (5 days) would be sufficient. This is 2 school weeks. I remember kids bringing weapons into my high school and seemingly receiving less.
The piece reads a little too "modern" for me, almost as if someone were trying to pull a fast one on us attempting to write in a "1950s style".
Although, the chemical to remove hair instead of shaving would be nice. Why hasn't anyone come up with a solution? When Gilette said they were doing "the next big thing" a few years back, I thought they meant a laser-guided (or laser-edged) razor. Instead, they bring a razor with 3 blades. The next innovation: 4!
Don't you think you're putting a little too much emphasis on Microsoft being "evil"?
Hitler was evil. Saddam Hussein (to an extent) was evil. Microsoft is a company. They may carry out practices you don't APPROVE OF, but evil is a completely different assumption.
If competitiveness and striving to take out your competitor is evil, you may as well throw in Sun, Oracle, and *gasp* the legions who follow Linux.
But all of your "objective truths" come from subjective news brought about by third parties and the makers of the movie "Pirates of Silicon Valley". Have you ever dealt with the corporation directly? I don't mean buying their products -- I mean going to work for them or doing business with them on a grand scale?
Or, like most people, are you simply making subjective statements based off news *you heard a certain way* during the trial proceedings? News corporations taint stories the way they feel like it -- that much is known.
I'm not saying Timothy McVeigh is ethical, but I don't think we as a society have a right to judge from the information we're given. Same with Microsoft.
Uh, maybe it's just me, but does anyone else think it's funny they used MS Graph (and presumably Excel) to draw the result graphs? You'd think they use StarOffice.
Slashdot Mirror
I know some people are chomping on the bit, here, but the problem isn't at all due to MS. It has to do more with software developers who are convinced that their product is marketable as standalone. See: antivirus vendors, browser makers, entertainment apps, etc.
When you get a car, there are certain assumptions that are definite. It's going to have an engine. It's going to have windshield wipers. However, the difference between these two things is that windshield wipers came much later, AFTER other people made businesses in enabling people to "see while it's raining". At some point, a secondary technology becomes so invaluable that you can't imagine the first existing without including it. Find me an OS, any OS today, that doesn't include a browser of some kind (whether it be free, Free, or monopoly).
Somewhere along the line McAffe and, to a lesser extent, Symantec, should have realized you can't have your business rely solely on fundamental flaws in other products. You're relying on their business model, then, and if they fix it you're sunk.
If MS closes the gaps better, they're screwed. If they include their own antivirus program, they're screwed. No matter what way you slice it, MS is actually doing the "right thing". Those doing "the wrong thing" decided their fate years ago.
"Jabba the Hutt will be digitally added to the label of the bottles too"
And crushing the grapes.
Why doesn't he go for Colt 45? He's already got the spokesman. "Lando Calrissian here for Colt 45. The galaxy's FINEST malt liquor beverage." (from a Who's Line Is It Anyway sketch).
The Controller S is near identical to the PS2. Actually, I find it a little more comfortable.
If Sony does this (somehow I doubt it, although a drop to $150 wouldn't be unexpected), MS has got to drop. Imagine picking up what's essentially a computer in a box for $99.
:)
To be honest, as a geek, Xbox has become my favorite plaything. The games have started to get very good (I've been playing Panzer Dragoon and Voodoo Vince pretty much non-stop) and, when you're ready to hack the system, all the parts are there. I actually have two: one legitimate one I use on Xbox Live and another I've sacrificed for hacking. Hard drive, Intel processor, networking, nice video: card all for $100? I'll pick up another.
And as Larry Niven put it in "Ringworld", we'll never be alone ever again.
What is this? Programming or religious vendetta? They are a company you don't like -- so what? It's only a computer operating system. People are not dying because they get Windows on their machines, any more than they get a particular engine with their new Toyota.
Grow up.
The right market would have been GameCube.
The demographics for Playstation are older males, savvy about AOL's "features", who may occasionally use Instant Messenger. The demographics for GameCube are young males (and females) are actual fanatics of the "real" AOL (subscribers) who aren't willing to investigate any of AOL's privacy/tracking "features".
I would hedge my bet, also, that the AOL package will pretty much require the hard drive (and the ethernet card/modem) which is going to make this an expensive upgrade for some. Sony is in a pickle that they couldn't get both pieces of the hardware in the basic set (as Microsoft is doing -- we'll see how well that pans out). But they will probably have to offset the purchase with rebates which will require -- you guessed it -- long-term subscriptions to AOL.
No matter what way you slice it, AOL wins in some capacity. They should have gone for GameCube though for the kill.
AOL. No question. WinCE on the Dreamcast was livable (most games never used it), but AOL's extensive tracking features? *groan*
Also, your logic is totally skewed.
You're going to be sorry when "your freakin kid" ends up at a community college, with a lower salary later on, and no innitative to try new things, when you didn't push him in school to try out many different activities. How can he/she find out "what they enjoy" when they aren't pushed to try new things? Sitting at home playing Nintendo doesn't count.
When a student is getting A's and B's, they are pushed to take on as many extracurricular activities as they can to show that "they are well-rounded". It supposedly helps get them into better schools.
For example, in addition to AP courses, I was an editor for the school's literary magazine, wrote for the newspaper, played ice hockey, did academic decathelon, and other stuff.
My girlfriend (she was validictorian of her class -- I was saluditorian one year before) was the captain of her tennis team, leader of SADD, a writer for the literary magazine, editor for the school's newspaper, etc.
There was occasionally a brilliant student that would get special attention (an 8th-grade student got to attend high school alegbra, for example) and they were many programs for certain niches of people, including the "smart kids", but this 2% thing is completely hogwash.
A compadre of mine got 1590 on her SATs, took every AP course the school offered, and was my competitor in every way, form, and fashion. My girlfriend was validictorian of her class (one year below me), scored something close to perfect on the verbal section of the SATs (I think her total score was above 1500) and was captain of the tennis team to boot.
We were also good friends. If either had been invited to any "special program" for the top 2%, I would've known about it.
From his other accomplishments (tae kwon do, violin, ribbons from various events) mentioned in the article, he doesn't seem like someone who'd be getting C's and D's.
In regards to this particular situation, this continues to underline the problems of "quiet children" which (I think) have recently come to light but have been brewing for years. That said, the young man probably had an inclination to commit suicide way before this: from what I've read, most people seem to think about it well beforehand.
And I agree with what someone else said: 10 days of suspension seems extremely rough. If this kid was actively trying to change grades (the article doesn't say) I would think a schoolweek (5 days) would be sufficient. This is 2 school weeks. I remember kids bringing weapons into my high school and seemingly receiving less.
Although, the chemical to remove hair instead of shaving would be nice. Why hasn't anyone come up with a solution? When Gilette said they were doing "the next big thing" a few years back, I thought they meant a laser-guided (or laser-edged) razor. Instead, they bring a razor with 3 blades. The next innovation: 4!
Why wasn't this declared "Flamebait"?
Actually, come to think of it, does anyone else feel a small bit of relief that former AOL execs are moving away from one less project in Linux?
Actually, Lomac reminds me more of "Lojack", the "anti-theft deteriant system".
Hitler was evil. Saddam Hussein (to an extent) was evil. Microsoft is a company. They may carry out practices you don't APPROVE OF, but evil is a completely different assumption.
If competitiveness and striving to take out your competitor is evil, you may as well throw in Sun, Oracle, and *gasp* the legions who follow Linux.
Or, like most people, are you simply making subjective statements based off news *you heard a certain way* during the trial proceedings? News corporations taint stories the way they feel like it -- that much is known.
I'm not saying Timothy McVeigh is ethical, but I don't think we as a society have a right to judge from the information we're given. Same with Microsoft.
Isn't that Quake 1? What's up with the Quake III logo? (By the way, why didn't they mod Quake III?)
Uh, maybe it's just me, but does anyone else think it's funny they used MS Graph (and presumably Excel) to draw the result graphs? You'd think they use StarOffice.
All I can say is subjective, subjective, subjective.
Actually, it's an OS independent study. And some of us like to hear the "shit" they teach us before we make opinions on the subject.