I disagree that outsourcing is bad. Generically that is like saying hiring a babysitter or a neighbor or anyone other than yourself is bad. So what are the indicators that outsourcing is bad? Just saying there are indicators is not the same as showing that the indicators are bad.
1) If you hire your son to mow your lawn, there is nothing stopping him from hiring his friend in turn... ala Tom Sawyer. If the job is unacceptable, make the terms part of the contract. 2) Customer service is not a function of outsourcing, it is a function of cost. You can have equally horrible customer service inside the US itself. 3) High turnover is also not a function of outsourcing, it is a function of management. If an employee has no training and advancement path then it is up to the employee to figure out their own. This is true of any company in any country.
All these problems would exist if the companies in question practiced homesourcing, where a company like IBM hired a temp agency in Alabama to support their developers in San Jose.
Again, why give work to a neighbor or a friend when you can do it yourself? Answer: Because division of labor and speciality encourages increased productivity when both parties can do separate things more effectively than both parties replicating work.
In this case the flaw with outsourcing is that there was not a good reason or a good implementation for the division of labor.
After playing Rayman and Sports, however, I do think your fun would increase two-fold if you bought a Wii... which coincidentally is less than twice a DS.
The original Nintendo/Famicom Lightgun/Zapper was released in 1985. It, of course, was in development prior to release in 1985. It seems to satisfy the obvious component, and since Nintendo developed it, it seems logical that they would have something similar in 2006 with the Wii.
Your response is logical but your original post was not. If you had said, originally, "I always buy AMD because they have been the most reliable CPU for me, regardless of performance," then it would have made perfect sense.
You reward AMD for reliability, not for performance.
Soft skills are almost the most important skill you can have.
Let me phrase a CS job in this way, and then you can see why:
You are solving a problem for someone. The only way the problem can be fixed correctly is if you can understand the problem (communication) and then convey the solution (more communication). Everything in between, the coding, the design, the engineering, is just a bridge that connects the problem to the solution.
So you reward AMD for mediocrity by buying AMD? Why would you do that to yourself when you can get more performance from Intel? Why the undying loyalty? And how much for you to transfer said loyalty to Apple?:P
It doesn't matter if you hate it, it is still the best tactic.
If you leave a 2 car gap (enough for another car to barely fit in) ahead of you and someone squeezes in, traffic will slow down; the car ahead of you will slow down out of fear of the guy behind him and the guy who cuts in will slow down so as not to "tailgate", assuming they have any sense. However if you are slower than the lane to your left and faster than the lane to the right, the only people "cutting in" are people leaving the fast lane or speeding up from the slow lane.
As an aside, I leave a 3 car gap open AS an invitation to merge! It means people can easily leave the fast lane or easily move into the faster lanes. If traffic is good, then who cares if someone comes in? If traffic is bad, what's the loss if everyone is already crawling at 10mph?
There are 9 iPod compatible games, 8 of which were not developed by Apple though there was Apple approval for those games. Also Apple has added the ALE, AAC, and Audible codecs via firmware for past iPods that were released without native capability.
My evidence was that if LnG had written a CSS compliant DVD playing software for the iPod then no circumvention would occur and they could legally sell iPods preloaded with CSS protected content.
I never meant to say it was real, only that LnG had a perfectly legal option. The iPod already plays MPEG2 640x480 video; a DVD is a CSS encoded 720x480 MPEG2 video, so writing a program to play back DVD VOB files is not nearly as hard as writing a codec to play, say, WMV.
The iPod can already play MPEG2, which is what DVDs are natively encoded in. The only thing the iPod can't do is use a CSS key to decrypt the VOB files.
No, I mean, there is no circumvention going on; the VOB files on the iPod are CSS encoded; the program, like Apple's DVD player, would read the encrypted VOB, apply the CSS key, decrypt it, and on the fly convert the MPEG2 stream into a 320x240 MPEG2 stream that the iPod can play back on it's screen.
That is what already happens when you play a 640x480 MPEG2 video on the iPod.
Not if your program was a registered and licensed DVD forum approved program. WinDVD, Apple DVD Player, a PS3, and the XBox 360 are all capable of playing DVDs and they all have to "capture a video stream" to display the movie onto the screen.
I can now copy the file of my preloaded iPod and upload the file to the internet. Why isn't that the same as a pirated disc?
The company should instead offer to preload fully encrypted videos onto an iPod, which does not violate DMCA, and instead write a program that allows iPods to play CSS encoded videos; by licensing a CSS key they have then fully complied with the licensing terms of the DVDs.
If the DMCA did not exist, then this would not be the issue, instead it would merely be a copyright issue.
Company develops an iPod compatible program that plays DVDs The company then provides a program to copy DVDs onto iPods without circumventing CSS The company then sells iPods preloaded with this software, to copy and play back
At no case has the company violated the DMCA nor copyright law.
Company purchases a DVD Company decrypts the DVD and burns to another DVD Company sells the decrypted DVD with the original DVD
How is that different or more legal than this: Company purchases a DVD Company decrypts the DVD and encodes to MP4 onto an iPod Company sells the iPod with the original DVD
Slashdot Mirror
I disagree that outsourcing is bad. Generically that is like saying hiring a babysitter or a neighbor or anyone other than yourself is bad. So what are the indicators that outsourcing is bad? Just saying there are indicators is not the same as showing that the indicators are bad.
1) If you hire your son to mow your lawn, there is nothing stopping him from hiring his friend in turn... ala Tom Sawyer. If the job is unacceptable, make the terms part of the contract.
2) Customer service is not a function of outsourcing, it is a function of cost. You can have equally horrible customer service inside the US itself.
3) High turnover is also not a function of outsourcing, it is a function of management. If an employee has no training and advancement path then it is up to the employee to figure out their own. This is true of any company in any country.
All these problems would exist if the companies in question practiced homesourcing, where a company like IBM hired a temp agency in Alabama to support their developers in San Jose.
Again, why give work to a neighbor or a friend when you can do it yourself?
Answer: Because division of labor and speciality encourages increased productivity when both parties can do separate things more effectively than both parties replicating work.
In this case the flaw with outsourcing is that there was not a good reason or a good implementation for the division of labor.
After playing Rayman and Sports, however, I do think your fun would increase two-fold if you bought a Wii... which coincidentally is less than twice a DS.
The original Nintendo/Famicom Lightgun/Zapper was released in 1985. It, of course, was in development prior to release in 1985. It seems to satisfy the obvious component, and since Nintendo developed it, it seems logical that they would have something similar in 2006 with the Wii.
If you convert to dollars that is $2m for Nintendo, $40m loss for Sony, and $5m loss for Microsoft.
Your response is logical but your original post was not. If you had said, originally, "I always buy AMD because they have been the most reliable CPU for me, regardless of performance," then it would have made perfect sense.
You reward AMD for reliability, not for performance.
Soft skills are almost the most important skill you can have.
Let me phrase a CS job in this way, and then you can see why:
You are solving a problem for someone. The only way the problem can be fixed correctly is if you can understand the problem (communication) and then convey the solution (more communication). Everything in between, the coding, the design, the engineering, is just a bridge that connects the problem to the solution.
Read carefully.
He said he ALWAYS buys AMD. Always means even when AMD does produce mediocre product.
I don't impugn their current offerings.
So you reward AMD for mediocrity by buying AMD? Why would you do that to yourself when you can get more performance from Intel? Why the undying loyalty? And how much for you to transfer said loyalty to Apple? :P
Intel Leapt Ahead.
4 months ago the Core2 had not been released.
Now AMD has to deal with an extremely overclockable Core2 Duo and Core2 Quad.
If you're stuck behind a slowpoke, I will HAPPILY pass you on the right. Eat my dust :P
It doesn't matter if you hate it, it is still the best tactic.
If you leave a 2 car gap (enough for another car to barely fit in) ahead of you and someone squeezes in, traffic will slow down; the car ahead of you will slow down out of fear of the guy behind him and the guy who cuts in will slow down so as not to "tailgate", assuming they have any sense. However if you are slower than the lane to your left and faster than the lane to the right, the only people "cutting in" are people leaving the fast lane or speeding up from the slow lane.
As an aside, I leave a 3 car gap open AS an invitation to merge! It means people can easily leave the fast lane or easily move into the faster lanes. If traffic is good, then who cares if someone comes in? If traffic is bad, what's the loss if everyone is already crawling at 10mph?
You forget that Nintendo could release a HD Wii in two years if they wished; I'm sure there are already designs internally for such a thing.
Most consumers will do no research and still get an iPod.
There are 9 iPod compatible games, 8 of which were not developed by Apple though there was Apple approval for those games. Also Apple has added the ALE, AAC, and Audible codecs via firmware for past iPods that were released without native capability.
The potential is certainly there.
My evidence was that if LnG had written a CSS compliant DVD playing software for the iPod then no circumvention would occur and they could legally sell iPods preloaded with CSS protected content.
I never meant to say it was real, only that LnG had a perfectly legal option. The iPod already plays MPEG2 640x480 video; a DVD is a CSS encoded 720x480 MPEG2 video, so writing a program to play back DVD VOB files is not nearly as hard as writing a codec to play, say, WMV.
My original post was that this company LnG would have been perfectly legal to develop an iPod compatible program that could read encrypted DVD files.
The iPod can already play MPEG2, which is what DVDs are natively encoded in. The only thing the iPod can't do is use a CSS key to decrypt the VOB files.
No, I mean, there is no circumvention going on; the VOB files on the iPod are CSS encoded; the program, like Apple's DVD player, would read the encrypted VOB, apply the CSS key, decrypt it, and on the fly convert the MPEG2 stream into a 320x240 MPEG2 stream that the iPod can play back on it's screen.
That is what already happens when you play a 640x480 MPEG2 video on the iPod.
Not if your program was a registered and licensed DVD forum approved program. WinDVD, Apple DVD Player, a PS3, and the XBox 360 are all capable of playing DVDs and they all have to "capture a video stream" to display the movie onto the screen.
Why is it absurd?
I can now copy the file of my preloaded iPod and upload the file to the internet. Why isn't that the same as a pirated disc?
The company should instead offer to preload fully encrypted videos onto an iPod, which does not violate DMCA, and instead write a program that allows iPods to play CSS encoded videos; by licensing a CSS key they have then fully complied with the licensing terms of the DVDs.
If the DMCA did not exist, then this would not be the issue, instead it would merely be a copyright issue.
Funny, I imagine both scenarios as wrong.
The scenario I think is "right" is as follows:
Company develops an iPod compatible program that plays DVDs
The company then provides a program to copy DVDs onto iPods without circumventing CSS
The company then sells iPods preloaded with this software, to copy and play back
At no case has the company violated the DMCA nor copyright law.
A decrypted copy is made isn't it?
Imagine this scenario instead:
Company purchases a DVD
Company decrypts the DVD and burns to another DVD
Company sells the decrypted DVD with the original DVD
How is that different or more legal than this:
Company purchases a DVD
Company decrypts the DVD and encodes to MP4 onto an iPod
Company sells the iPod with the original DVD
iTunes and the iPod works on Vista.
Why not the Zune?
As I said in another post, the problem is that iTunes, the iPod, and Quicktime already support Vista, as well as XP and Mac OS X.
Zune only supports XP. It's just sloppy on Microsoft's part.
The problem is that iTunes, the iPod, and Quicktime all work with Vista, XP, and Mac, while the Zune only works with XP.