You seem to be totally ignoring the fact that adding one more customer costs essentially zero dollars.
Those radio waves still hit the planet, whether there's a dish to receive it on your roof or not.
Point 1) Since all channels go to everybody, having the decoder NOT decode certain channels is a zero-cost option. It's not like they have to launch more satellites to give me just the channels I want. They can lock it out on the box.
Point 2) They're already broadcasting all the channels that are available (more or less) so streamlining their offering (and whoa! maybe cutting down on some with VERY few viewers!) would be a cost savings.
Point 3) Unless you've bought your own satellite. I don't know if these firms own the whole bird, but I think Hughes/Echostar does. However, decreasing your required TV bandwidth would allow you to sell bandwidth to others.
Point 4) You set up a cost structure that works. Transmitting lots of people channels they don't want doesn't make sense. Work out a deal where you pay the content provider by the eyeball, so you don't have to pay as much for less popular shows (that could still be profitable, because you could structure your user pricing around that).
Why would this option cost more? I don't use a tiny fraction of the available channels on my cable feed. Why should I pay for them? It's a similar issue with satellite.
"The long term success of the content providers is certainly worth supporting."
The long-term price fixing by bundling practices of the content providers is most emphatically NOT worth supporting. Sho'would like a free market in satellite TV. I could sign up for the four channels I really like, and tell the rest to bugger off. I get the stuff I want for a fair price, and none of the other cruft.
I have a tool that has a multi-bit screwdriver in the butt, and one of those weird crescent wrench kind of things that grip two faces of the bolt, with the third engaged by a screw.
The wrench head folds 90 degrees, so that the (big heavy duty) screw head can be used as a light duty hammer.
With that, and my Leatherman, I have infinite power. Now I just need a good pocket welding (not brazing) system. : )
The leatherman that your friend used can't take the use that he put it to. Mine (the Leatherman Wave) has been in service for over six years, after I broke my second Gerber MultiPlier.
When they say your mileage may vary, this is what they are talking about.
You've obviously never even tried to open a Leatherman. The hinges are so tight that opening it with a flip is simply not possible.
Me, I use the outside blades more than the pliers, so I'd rather have one-handed access to those. And the Gerber pliers always seemed to bite the pads of my fingers.
I replaced my MultiPlier with the Wave and never looked back. Having one-handed access to the sheepsfoot AND the straight blades (not that crappy combo-blade you get on some of the Gerbers) and a pair of scissors that actually work, coupled with good needle-nose pliers sold me.
I tried the new Legend 800 for a week, and then took it back. I love the replaceable wire cutter blade, but the thing is way too damn bulky (nearly twice the volume of my Wave, and doesn't fit in the scabbard I like) and I can't close the knife blades with one hand. It also has a better tool adaptor. I liked the lightweight one on the Gerber, but the Leatherman one is more flexible and seems like a sturdier joint.
To each their own. You'll have to fight me for my Wave, though. : )
That is freakin' absurd. Is it illegal to carry a screwdriver? I'd have a much easier time maiming somebody with a screwdriver, but it's not as useful for the things I use my pocketknife for on a daily basis that have nothing whatsoever to do with my job.
While we're making stupid analogies, I'd say OSX is the full-boat Snap On rig, carpentry and cabinetmaking tools, chainsaws, and a really smart robot that you can make do your work for you.
I would love to know what people are doing to crash Classic MacOS so much. I used a PowerMac 6100 from System 7.1 to 8.5 as my primary computer for seven years, and I had uptimes measured in hundreds of days.
Just my experience. Maybe OS9 was a piece of crap, but I never had the problems that some people complain about.
Yeah, because everybody who advocates not Macintoshes always use well-reasoned debating tactics, and never ever wave their arms and say stupid things. Right.
There are fuckwits in any community. There are smart people in any community. It's called a normal distribution.
However, why the heck does the Mac need to come into the mainstream? It's doing just great where it is. Don't like their products? Fine. Don't buy them. That's cool.
I wasn't making fun of it. I simply said that I need to get a job before I can start paying for this shit.
If you think that the end user isn't going to get soaked at every turn by unscrupulous corporations and/or governments in order to implement this policy, I think you're a crazyperson.
And re: your slavery argument, I invoke Gibson's Corollary to Godwin's Law. The first person who calls the other person a slaver automatically loses.
Public education was obviously a joke, but here in the United States the system needs serious help. Like dissolution of the Teacher's Union ownership of the system, since apparently all the teachers don't want to be teachers, but administrators. In my school district, administrators outnumber teachers three to one. That's ridiculous.
As far as commonly-replaced consumer goods go, I think that computer cases are very low on the spectrum of "environmentally hostile objects".
That was my point.
My other point is that this article doesn't even mention the notion that maybe PC manufacturers could be more environmentally responsible. They just put the onus on the consumer, and say "Upgrade, don't replace!" as if that's going to be the only way to get on top of this problem.
Slashdot Mirror
You seem to be totally ignoring the fact that adding one more customer costs essentially zero dollars.
Those radio waves still hit the planet, whether there's a dish to receive it on your roof or not.
Point 1) Since all channels go to everybody, having the decoder NOT decode certain channels is a zero-cost option. It's not like they have to launch more satellites to give me just the channels I want. They can lock it out on the box.
Point 2) They're already broadcasting all the channels that are available (more or less) so streamlining their offering (and whoa! maybe cutting down on some with VERY few viewers!) would be a cost savings.
Point 3) Unless you've bought your own satellite. I don't know if these firms own the whole bird, but I think Hughes/Echostar does. However, decreasing your required TV bandwidth would allow you to sell bandwidth to others.
Point 4) You set up a cost structure that works. Transmitting lots of people channels they don't want doesn't make sense. Work out a deal where you pay the content provider by the eyeball, so you don't have to pay as much for less popular shows (that could still be profitable, because you could structure your user pricing around that).
Why would this option cost more? I don't use a tiny fraction of the available channels on my cable feed. Why should I pay for them? It's a similar issue with satellite.
"The long term success of the content providers is certainly worth supporting."
The long-term price fixing by bundling practices of the content providers is most emphatically NOT worth supporting. Sho'would like a free market in satellite TV. I could sign up for the four channels I really like, and tell the rest to bugger off. I get the stuff I want for a fair price, and none of the other cruft.
Breaking anti-trust agreement==crime.
Me, I think MS is three strikes and they're out. I would LOVE to see their corporate charter revoked.
BBEdit, baby. There is no substitute.
To pick a teeny nit:
If you think the movie on demand COSTS Dish $3.99 as much as a dollar, I think you're nutty.
: )
I have a tool that has a multi-bit screwdriver in the butt, and one of those weird crescent wrench kind of things that grip two faces of the bolt, with the third engaged by a screw.
The wrench head folds 90 degrees, so that the (big heavy duty) screw head can be used as a light duty hammer.
With that, and my Leatherman, I have infinite power. Now I just need a good pocket welding (not brazing) system. : )
The leatherman that your friend used can't take the use that he put it to. Mine (the Leatherman Wave) has been in service for over six years, after I broke my second Gerber MultiPlier.
When they say your mileage may vary, this is what they are talking about.
Butterfly flip open thing?
:)
You've obviously never even tried to open a Leatherman. The hinges are so tight that opening it with a flip is simply not possible.
Me, I use the outside blades more than the pliers, so I'd rather have one-handed access to those. And the Gerber pliers always seemed to bite the pads of my fingers.
Oh well. Different tools for different peeps.
I replaced my MultiPlier with the Wave and never looked back. Having one-handed access to the sheepsfoot AND the straight blades (not that crappy combo-blade you get on some of the Gerbers) and a pair of scissors that actually work, coupled with good needle-nose pliers sold me.
I tried the new Legend 800 for a week, and then took it back. I love the replaceable wire cutter blade, but the thing is way too damn bulky (nearly twice the volume of my Wave, and doesn't fit in the scabbard I like) and I can't close the knife blades with one hand. It also has a better tool adaptor. I liked the lightweight one on the Gerber, but the Leatherman one is more flexible and seems like a sturdier joint.
To each their own. You'll have to fight me for my Wave, though. : )
Hmm...costs $40 more than my Leatherman Wave, I can't open any of the blades one-handed, and it doesn't have scissors?
You can have it, buddy. I've used my Wave for more than six years, and it is the finest multitool on the planet. I have tried them ALL.
It's illegal. To carry. A POCKETKNIFE.
That is freakin' absurd. Is it illegal to carry a screwdriver? I'd have a much easier time maiming somebody with a screwdriver, but it's not as useful for the things I use my pocketknife for on a daily basis that have nothing whatsoever to do with my job.
Stop the world. I want to get off.
I'd like the same post please, only with more acronyms.
: )
While we're making stupid analogies, I'd say OSX is the full-boat Snap On rig, carpentry and cabinetmaking tools, chainsaws, and a really smart robot that you can make do your work for you.
But it is still a stupid analogy.
How would writing a port of OSX for X86 increase Apple's hardware sales?
Whatever fumes you are exposing yourself to are getting to your head.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. We must all worship the hegemony of Free Software, and its One True Way.
Viva la revolucion!
Dell had ENGINEERS? Ah, the good old days...
*snort*
Yeah. Just like every single MS update since time immemorial has Made Computing Safer. Uh huh.
Get used to it. Most peoples' parents are lazy users. A properly engineered system allows for that. Windows is not properly engineered.
Can it be made to work securely? More or less, yeah. Is it nearly as elegant a solution as MacOS? Hell no.
Uh huh.
Hook a USB printer to a Linux box, make it actually work, and tell me it's just as easy as hooking one to a Mac.
Then put down the crack pipe and understand that, amazingly enough, there are some things Linux is not well-suited for.
I would love to know what people are doing to crash Classic MacOS so much. I used a PowerMac 6100 from System 7.1 to 8.5 as my primary computer for seven years, and I had uptimes measured in hundreds of days.
Just my experience. Maybe OS9 was a piece of crap, but I never had the problems that some people complain about.
He said SD card. Don't think there are any hard drives that'll fit in one of those.
Yeah, because everybody who advocates not Macintoshes always use well-reasoned debating tactics, and never ever wave their arms and say stupid things. Right.
There are fuckwits in any community. There are smart people in any community. It's called a normal distribution.
However, why the heck does the Mac need to come into the mainstream? It's doing just great where it is. Don't like their products? Fine. Don't buy them. That's cool.
What makes this a "cheap marketing trick"? Sounds like a pretty clever, useful product to me.
But what the hell do I know?
I wasn't making fun of it. I simply said that I need to get a job before I can start paying for this shit.
If you think that the end user isn't going to get soaked at every turn by unscrupulous corporations and/or governments in order to implement this policy, I think you're a crazyperson.
And re: your slavery argument, I invoke Gibson's Corollary to Godwin's Law. The first person who calls the other person a slaver automatically loses.
Public education was obviously a joke, but here in the United States the system needs serious help. Like dissolution of the Teacher's Union ownership of the system, since apparently all the teachers don't want to be teachers, but administrators. In my school district, administrators outnumber teachers three to one. That's ridiculous.
ROFL
Oh, that's a good one. *wipes tear from eye*
A government actually reducing tax in a meaningful way? Oh man. Pass me that shit you're smoking.
As far as commonly-replaced consumer goods go, I think that computer cases are very low on the spectrum of "environmentally hostile objects".
That was my point.
My other point is that this article doesn't even mention the notion that maybe PC manufacturers could be more environmentally responsible. They just put the onus on the consumer, and say "Upgrade, don't replace!" as if that's going to be the only way to get on top of this problem.