Anyone concerned about what some asshole could do to ruin the fun? Like, I don't know -- place an AIDS infected syringe under the pile of goodies.
The stuff of urban legends, I know, but there's still a lot of strange people out there.
(Funniest bit of all: we're all into server and box security. We don't want anyone touching our files or seeing what silly little sites we've been to. But we leave our physical goods out in the open for others to scavenge?:) Talk about mixed up principles).
I can't imagine many things easier to fake than a server log.
Are you kidding? When I worked at my last internship the boss would take the server stats from WebTrends, plop it in a Word file (to look good for investors) and then sometimes "moderately improve" some of the stats before printing the document.
Fact is, most investors don't get a verbatim server log with all the technical "mumbo-jumbo". They get a simplified version with only the information the CEO wants them to hear.
"Fly!" made a good deal of money, along with all the Jane simulations (which made it even more strange when less were announced this year. They've been making a pretty decent profit).
And let's not forget the "pseudo" sims, like Crimson Skies. I bought that game yesterday and it absolutely rocks.
Given the relatively quick turnarounds technology companies have, I don't feel inclined to put 3DFX down for the count. They were a pioneer (along with PowerVR) and pioneers aren't always rewarded in their time.
In PowerVR's example, they no longer make PC cards in bulk, but their chipset is in use with the Dreamcast. It has shown to be surprisingly robust and has turned the Dreamcast from a dark horse into a system with some incredible games (Sonic Adventure, NFL 2K1, Jet Grind Radio, etc.)
Same goes for ATI, which has been running in neutral for the last few years, then released the jaw-dropping Radeon this year.
Point is, don't count 3DFX out yet. Their latest chipsets are nothing extraordinary, but a few engineers and some faith within their infrastructure might be enough to turn them around.
I really don't think most entertainment should be open source. What's the benefit? Part of the allure of watching entertainment is to *not* know what's going on in the background. Games == movies I think, in this case.
Living in America, entertainment is a prized thing which pay for greatly. While I don't agree with some extravagant ticket prices, I can easily see why some people charge to make a small profit on games (Nintendo exempted, as they usually overcharge).
Besides, it's a flight sim, not some ASCII game with 2K of code. A lot of work goes into the physics and dynamic weather conditions in these things. Some sims charge up to $50 -- very high for computer games. I've seen a few around $100.
Point is, there's a hell of a lot of work involved. This is not a "hobby" that will yield an OS like Linux for others to use -- it's just a game that you're investing your time in. If you want to make a buck off your time, I say go for it.
Several hundred of your best customers taking their money out of your bank because their PIN numbers have been stolen? Yeah, I think that would be enough to make a manager weep.
I always thought the whole PIN number thing was a huge security issue anyway. It seems far more insecure than an English word password (there are less options -- 9 digits on a keypad or 26 letter in an alphabet). Also, most people don't go past 4 numbers for their PIN, even if they have the option. It would be pretty easy to use a heat spectrometer to analyse what PIN it is immediately after they've been pushed -- or better yet, look over the person's shoulder if you're in the vicinity.
I've never been a big fan of security. I think some measures people go to protecting basic servers and files can be a little too extreme. But this is your money -- your lifeblood in this day and age where $ == bread and water. I think the security is far more important here.
He is correct. Outlook can be made quite easily to send HTML-only mail. The extensions this [clearly uneducated pseudo-]journalist is talking about only deal with special meeting and scheduling tags used within Outlook. Outside Outlook there would really be no reason to have them (for example, what would KMail use with a "meeting at 2:00 PM" tag?)
This is more or less a classic example of not getting enough information then placing blame on a non-blameworthy party. Beating up on Microsoft is in fashion, remember (soon it will be beating up on RedHat, then Yahoo, then AMD, etc.). It's a cycle.
I may be reading a bit much into this paragraph, but it seems to me that this paragraph says 'if your friends can't get your email, it's their servers fault, not yours.
These extensions have nothing to do with removing plaintext from a message, only producing fancy formating and messages within Outlook (to schedule a meeting, for example). If you send an email to a non-Outlook user they will read it just fine.
I think this is a classic case of a pseudo-journalist clearly over-stepping his or her boundaries and not properly researching the material. Nothing in Outlook prevents outside users from reading the emails. They just won't recieve the special features Outlook provides within emails (what Eudora would do with a "meeting" tag is beyond me anyway).
I feel the same way trying to tweak the XF86Config file to have a proper refresh rate on my monitor. Except a mistake here may ruin my monitor permanently.
Of course, if we were playing Unreal Tournament (the better game in my opinion) where security and performance patches come rapidly, we wouldn't have our mods break.:) Just touting the better game...
God, you guys are a bunch of angry bastards. True, screenshots show nothing about the OS - but neither did Mac OS X's. The underlying features, while "closed code", will be partially revealed in development kit and on Microsoft's sites. I for one want to get my hands on the new Administrator control panel (it looks fabulous).
Explaining the administrator/client model to the average home user, and why they "need it", is one of the biggest problems of OS's like Linux and Mac OS X today. If the OS makes it clearer in terms of descriptions and icons, I'm all for it.
I think the problem comes in the way some people handle the code hypocritically. They praise free software, vouch for commercial software that fills certain goals, but shoot down other sources of software they deem "wrong", like Microsoft.
To be fair, you really have to take all software: free and otherwise, and treat it with an equal hand. This includes comparisons between "good" and "not good" commercial software, as well as the occasional "good"/"not good" free software debacle (usually resulting when someone strays only slightly from GPL or other licenses).
If I was totally narrow-minded, I would have missed out on Windows 2000, which I think is one of the most robust platforms for hardware ever. I would have also missed out on Linux. Point is, saying a company is morally wrong for trying to make a buck off software is... well... wrong.
Particularly when some of us are or will be making our livelihoods on software sales (coming out of college soon, hardware simply isn't where it's at).
OK, someone needs to take a deep breath here. Anonymous Coward (I'm beginning to think it's the same guy each time): Slashdot is not a war or an attack on your religious beliefs. It's a place to post ideas and argue the benefits and detractions. You seem to focus on the negatives a bit too much, friend.
First, in response to a lot of people's complaints about my wording of the article, read here and here. I also submitted that Slashback article several days ago, so it hasn't aged well.
To the response I am simply a "troll" (which I don't agree with in the slightest) read here. This is another article I recently submitted and got accepted.
It's their company now - why shouldn't they enforce NT laws? Would a Linux company say to an acquired startup "Gee, it's nice you're using NT. We wouldn't dare consider shifting you to Linux". Of course not. They'd move them as soon as possible.
I was beginning to think 3DFX was dead in the water. True, the card doesn't have the same feature set, but the performance is more than respectable.
Only question I have is how hot this thing is going to get? My Voodoo 3000 AGP get blisteringly hot after some games, and it only has a heatsink. This card has two fans!
Slashdot Mirror
What, a broken website? :)
The stuff of urban legends, I know, but there's still a lot of strange people out there.
(Funniest bit of all: we're all into server and box security. We don't want anyone touching our files or seeing what silly little sites we've been to. But we leave our physical goods out in the open for others to scavenge? :) Talk about mixed up principles).
Are you kidding? When I worked at my last internship the boss would take the server stats from WebTrends, plop it in a Word file (to look good for investors) and then sometimes "moderately improve" some of the stats before printing the document.
Fact is, most investors don't get a verbatim server log with all the technical "mumbo-jumbo". They get a simplified version with only the information the CEO wants them to hear.
And let's not forget the "pseudo" sims, like Crimson Skies. I bought that game yesterday and it absolutely rocks.
In PowerVR's example, they no longer make PC cards in bulk, but their chipset is in use with the Dreamcast. It has shown to be surprisingly robust and has turned the Dreamcast from a dark horse into a system with some incredible games (Sonic Adventure, NFL 2K1, Jet Grind Radio, etc.)
Same goes for ATI, which has been running in neutral for the last few years, then released the jaw-dropping Radeon this year.
Point is, don't count 3DFX out yet. Their latest chipsets are nothing extraordinary, but a few engineers and some faith within their infrastructure might be enough to turn them around.
Name one hard-core flightsim that has recouped its development costs. Microsoft Flight Simulator in its many iterations.
$238095 a year for a coder? You must be paid extremely well where you work.
Living in America, entertainment is a prized thing which pay for greatly. While I don't agree with some extravagant ticket prices, I can easily see why some people charge to make a small profit on games (Nintendo exempted, as they usually overcharge).
Besides, it's a flight sim, not some ASCII game with 2K of code. A lot of work goes into the physics and dynamic weather conditions in these things. Some sims charge up to $50 -- very high for computer games. I've seen a few around $100.
Point is, there's a hell of a lot of work involved. This is not a "hobby" that will yield an OS like Linux for others to use -- it's just a game that you're investing your time in. If you want to make a buck off your time, I say go for it.
I always thought the whole PIN number thing was a huge security issue anyway. It seems far more insecure than an English word password (there are less options -- 9 digits on a keypad or 26 letter in an alphabet). Also, most people don't go past 4 numbers for their PIN, even if they have the option. It would be pretty easy to use a heat spectrometer to analyse what PIN it is immediately after they've been pushed -- or better yet, look over the person's shoulder if you're in the vicinity.
I've never been a big fan of security. I think some measures people go to protecting basic servers and files can be a little too extreme. But this is your money -- your lifeblood in this day and age where $ == bread and water. I think the security is far more important here.
From the article, an Apple representative says its to buy back seven years of development costs.
Better graphics do not a better game make.
I'd enjoy it more if it was a PS2 or Dreamcast. At least the Dreamcast is small to begin with. Converting it can't be too hard.
It seems more of a rant on OS X than anything else. I agree wholeheartedly: paying $25 for a beta OS is ridiculous.
There is no quality assurance with any free software. That's why fee-based software is so much more popular (like Windows).
This is more or less a classic example of not getting enough information then placing blame on a non-blameworthy party. Beating up on Microsoft is in fashion, remember (soon it will be beating up on RedHat, then Yahoo, then AMD, etc.). It's a cycle.
These extensions have nothing to do with removing plaintext from a message, only producing fancy formating and messages within Outlook (to schedule a meeting, for example). If you send an email to a non-Outlook user they will read it just fine.
I think this is a classic case of a pseudo-journalist clearly over-stepping his or her boundaries and not properly researching the material. Nothing in Outlook prevents outside users from reading the emails. They just won't recieve the special features Outlook provides within emails (what Eudora would do with a "meeting" tag is beyond me anyway).
I feel the same way trying to tweak the XF86Config file to have a proper refresh rate on my monitor. Except a mistake here may ruin my monitor permanently.
Of course, if we were playing Unreal Tournament (the better game in my opinion) where security and performance patches come rapidly, we wouldn't have our mods break. :) Just touting the better game...
Explaining the administrator/client model to the average home user, and why they "need it", is one of the biggest problems of OS's like Linux and Mac OS X today. If the OS makes it clearer in terms of descriptions and icons, I'm all for it.
To be fair, you really have to take all software: free and otherwise, and treat it with an equal hand. This includes comparisons between "good" and "not good" commercial software, as well as the occasional "good"/"not good" free software debacle (usually resulting when someone strays only slightly from GPL or other licenses).
If I was totally narrow-minded, I would have missed out on Windows 2000, which I think is one of the most robust platforms for hardware ever. I would have also missed out on Linux. Point is, saying a company is morally wrong for trying to make a buck off software is... well... wrong.
Particularly when some of us are or will be making our livelihoods on software sales (coming out of college soon, hardware simply isn't where it's at).
First, in response to a lot of people's complaints about my wording of the article, read here and here. I also submitted that Slashback article several days ago, so it hasn't aged well.
To the response I am simply a "troll" (which I don't agree with in the slightest) read here. This is another article I recently submitted and got accepted.
Remember, deep breaths.
It's their company now - why shouldn't they enforce NT laws? Would a Linux company say to an acquired startup "Gee, it's nice you're using NT. We wouldn't dare consider shifting you to Linux". Of course not. They'd move them as soon as possible.
Only question I have is how hot this thing is going to get? My Voodoo 3000 AGP get blisteringly hot after some games, and it only has a heatsink. This card has two fans!
This is the only significant feature I've found lacking in Mozilla. How about having a session of pages rendered correctly without crashing? :)
I thought I recalled Palm OS only supporting up to 256 colors. Anyone?