Then why phrase it as "The Internet was going to kill brick-and-mortar stores." and not "The Internet was going to kill music and movies"? Though of course that's a question for BMO not you.
The Internet was going to kill brick-and-mortar stores.
It didn't.
This one is quite incorrect. There are plenty of brick-and-mortar stores that died due to the Internet.
Before you say "well there are stores that didn't", then I guess I can say "Cancer doesn't kill people since there are a non-zero amount of people that don't die from it"
So a "cloudspace" is something both no one can see (because privacy) but everyone can see (to inter-operate with other 'cloudspaces')? Might as well call it "Schroedingers Space"
Tetris? Even Doom (whose storyline seems more like a justification for the art direction) got a movie? Think about Halo, Half Life, Borderlands/2, Portal 2, maybe even Prey, for example, who have a fair amount of potential in their storylines to make a movie that didn't suck. Not that they are immune to bad direction, but you know damn well there are some _rich_ universes/stories out there that could be outstanding in a film.
edit - captcha: arguable
I didn't realize Tetris was the only video game that wasn't an FPS.
Do you mean their not supporting legacy systems and code? Yet when Microsoft devs were writing bug fixes within their OS code to account for legacy software, they were chastised. You cannot have it both ways - you either support them supporting legacy code (and all the headache that comes with it) or you support them requiring updates. Both have significant security/cost implications.
Mozilla is no longer chasing users or market share.
Mozilla is chasing sponsorship $'s from third parties. (e.g. Pocket)
Once Mozilla has exhausted this dubious source of $, they will sellout to a spyware provider; members of the board will each get a cut of the sale and dissolve Mozilla.
As opposed to Chrome and IE that get it directly from Google and Microsoft respectively. How exactly should Mozilla pay their employees?
and if it has to do with Microsoft we can all say it's bad because Microsoft, if it's Linux we can comment about systemd, and if it's Apple make a reference to walled gardens! Surely that'll never get old and people will love to submit more articles.
I think the conversation has gotten sidetracked. If you don't think they are worth the price given the features that's a whole other thing. I am just saying it's flawed to think it should be free because you pay your ISP.
Maybe that's where your frustration comes from. Both PlayStation Network and Xbox Live offer much more than a 20person FPS match. You may not be interested in those things, though. I also think it's always on their servers instead of scattered around the developer/publisher like PC. The features may not interest you, and the servers may not make a difference to you, but those are reasons why it's different than your example of 20 years ago.
OK how about you always drive over a bridge, but over time upkeep got too expensive so now it's a pay toll.
Saying my analogy is poor yet acting like video games haven't changed in two decades is hilarious.
Sorry, whatever analogy you're trying to make there, I'm not seeing it.
OK I'll try to explain it again. Paying the ISP is just the "roadway" to that information, that much you seemed to get. Once you get to your destination, (a store in the car analogy, a website/service in the Internet one), it is up to the owner of that store/website to dictate a price.
You're arguing that the destination should be free because you already paid for the journey.
So, your #1 draw for console gaming is real-time multiplayer, and you're not willing to pay for it. I'm not going to argue about whether MS or Sony are making a huge profit off their subscription prices, but I'm sure that the infrastructure that they've put in place did not come free and the cost has to be covered somehow.
Yes, it does. It's called your Internet connection, and you pay your ISP for it.
I pay for my car and its gas, therefore any store I drive to should give me their stuff for free.
Slashdot Mirror
No it isn't as the Internet also _saved_ a lot of stores* that otherwise be closed!
It can be both.
Then why phrase it as "The Internet was going to kill brick-and-mortar stores." and not "The Internet was going to kill music and movies"? Though of course that's a question for BMO not you.
The Internet was going to kill brick-and-mortar stores.
It didn't.
This one is quite incorrect. There are plenty of brick-and-mortar stores that died due to the Internet.
Before you say "well there are stores that didn't", then I guess I can say "Cancer doesn't kill people since there are a non-zero amount of people that don't die from it"
So a "cloudspace" is something both no one can see (because privacy) but everyone can see (to inter-operate with other 'cloudspaces')? Might as well call it "Schroedingers Space"
I don't know why Google doesn't just force updates like Apple does.
Google already forces updates on just as many 3rd party manufacturers as Apple does on their 3rd party manufacturers.
Maybe your fellow engineer should manage that mission critical computer and not have it just install updates on its own.
Given the rapid adoption of Windows 10, and the fact that it is used far more than OS X and Linux combined, I'd say pretty good.
Tetris? Even Doom (whose storyline seems more like a justification for the art direction) got a movie? Think about Halo, Half Life, Borderlands/2, Portal 2, maybe even Prey, for example, who have a fair amount of potential in their storylines to make a movie that didn't suck. Not that they are immune to bad direction, but you know damn well there are some _rich_ universes/stories out there that could be outstanding in a film.
edit - captcha: arguable
I didn't realize Tetris was the only video game that wasn't an FPS.
UK knock up = US wake someone up
US knock up = UK impregnate (often unintentionally)
This drunk girl slept with me and then I knocked her up.
In 1989 I flew to the UK from the USA and got a rental car for 7 days for $550. The flight was niche and the food was pretty good.
Is that $550 adjusted for inflation?
All versions of Firefox are bad since they became like Chrome
Firefox should be pared down and just do the web well, and fast, like Chrome.
Do you mean their not supporting legacy systems and code? Yet when Microsoft devs were writing bug fixes within their OS code to account for legacy software, they were chastised. You cannot have it both ways - you either support them supporting legacy code (and all the headache that comes with it) or you support them requiring updates. Both have significant security/cost implications.
It's not both ways, it's one way:
Did Microsoft do it?
Then it's bad.
Out of thin air like all the ideal paywall-less ad-free sites I expect the internet to be.
This is Slashdot, Sharepoint is bad because M$. You wouldn't understand because you're a Microsoft shill.
Let's say they reduce their staff down to what you deem necessary, the question still stands:
How exactly should Mozilla pay their employees?
Mozilla is no longer chasing users or market share.
Mozilla is chasing sponsorship $'s from third parties. (e.g. Pocket)
Once Mozilla has exhausted this dubious source of $, they will sellout to a spyware provider; members of the board will each get a cut of the sale and dissolve Mozilla.
As opposed to Chrome and IE that get it directly from Google and Microsoft respectively.
How exactly should Mozilla pay their employees?
and if it has to do with Microsoft we can all say it's bad because Microsoft, if it's Linux we can comment about systemd, and if it's Apple make a reference to walled gardens!
Surely that'll never get old and people will love to submit more articles.
If he polls much better, why has he only won 1 of the past 6 states?
Well then, less retorts from me since you don't feel that paying for the ISP means you get all Internet content for free.
If you're a developer of a game for PS4 or Xbox One and want it to have multiplayer, you don't really have a choice, do you? I honestly don't know.
I think the conversation has gotten sidetracked. If you don't think they are worth the price given the features that's a whole other thing.
I am just saying it's flawed to think it should be free because you pay your ISP.
Maybe that's where your frustration comes from.
Both PlayStation Network and Xbox Live offer much more than a 20person FPS match. You may not be interested in those things, though.
I also think it's always on their servers instead of scattered around the developer/publisher like PC. The features may not interest you, and the servers may not make a difference to you, but those are reasons why it's different than your example of 20 years ago.
OK how about you always drive over a bridge, but over time upkeep got too expensive so now it's a pay toll. Saying my analogy is poor yet acting like video games haven't changed in two decades is hilarious.
Sorry, whatever analogy you're trying to make there, I'm not seeing it.
OK I'll try to explain it again.
Paying the ISP is just the "roadway" to that information, that much you seemed to get. Once you get to your destination, (a store in the car analogy, a website/service in the Internet one), it is up to the owner of that store/website to dictate a price.
You're arguing that the destination should be free because you already paid for the journey.
$TechCo sues $TechInc and vice versa:
That's a bad thing! All they do is sue!
$TechCo agrees to drop all cases agains $TechInc and vice versa:
That's a bad thing! It's a "cartel".
Yet another "Damned if they do, damned if they don't" comment brought to you by Slashdot.
So, your #1 draw for console gaming is real-time multiplayer, and you're not willing to pay for it. I'm not going to argue about whether MS or Sony are making a huge profit off their subscription prices, but I'm sure that the infrastructure that they've put in place did not come free and the cost has to be covered somehow.
Yes, it does. It's called your Internet connection, and you pay your ISP for it.
I pay for my car and its gas, therefore any store I drive to should give me their stuff for free.