Go look at a specific size and/or brand of TV for the last 30 years. Go watch how little has actually changed. like I said, small resolution leaps, and such. Meanwhile, the price has remained very consistent with inflation regardless of things being cheaper to produce. Oh you will notice one thing though. The TV's actually got smaller when switched from a standard measurement to widescreen.
Meanwhile, over here in reality, prices have fallen in nominal dollars, plummeted in inflation adjusted dollars, and resolution has increased more than 4 fold (that's spatially). Sure, those things aren't as true in the 20" TV space, but no one cares, 35" TVs have become quite affordable.
What does price manipulation have to do with "tvs haven't changed in 30 years" being blatantly wrong?
I certainly agree that government should regulate corporations in a way that benefits people more than it benefits corporations, but I also don't see any corporations that have me over a barrel (so apparently I see the transactions that I enter into as beneficial). I guess next you should accuse me of having blinders on.
I sort of like that I don't have to get 3 friends to come help me move my LCD.
You could probably track down one of the Sony WEGA tvs if you are really willing to spend $2,500, I think they mostly skipped Sony's quality decline (but it won't do 1080p, and it will weigh at least half as much as you do, maybe more than you).
30 years ago, you could hardly buy a television that wasn't a CRT, and if you wanted something over 30", you had to be very prepared to bust out your wallet. Today, a 30" LCD costs $750 (or whatever, I'm probably within $250, which is fine when you consider that the 30 year old television probably cost $2,500, and those numbers don't bother to account for inflation).
Sure, but 100 watts for a month is going to cost around $7, so if the PC in question happens to be a power hungry desktop, that $10 or $15 per month might be better applied to an upgraded cell phone plan or whatever.
Their website indicates that the PC needs and active internet connection, so I am pretty sure it won't, so for the purposes of this discussion, sleep pretty much means not on.
Not everyone leaves their PC on all the time, and they might want to spend their dollars on some other phone service, rather than electricity.
I guess the biggest way it is different from a cell phone is that a cell phone uses a few watt hours a day (or less), whereas a desktop might use 2 or 3 kilowatt hours a day (but potentially quite a lot more).
Well, I'd be sort of pissed if I had to have the engine running in order to use the stereo.
Anyway, you consider it obvious that the device 'works with your computer', others might think that it 'works with your internet', in which case they have misunderstood the device, but not in a particularly egregious way (especially when there are VOIP bridges that are standalone).
You are reading awful narrowly, he doesn't mean "You have to leave your pc on all the time or the world will explode", he means "You have to leave your PC on if you want to make and receive calls".
I eat delicious animals, but it is worth pointing out that plenty of animals die in the name of keeping grains and other produce clean and/or attractive.
Sorry to reply twice: Also, the idea might be to make Netflix less attractive, which makes (foregoing Netflix entirely and) purchasing more attractive.
I don't think it is overall a great idea or anything, but I doubt that they (WB) are actually going to lose money on the deal (they may incur an opportunity cost though).
I understand what you are getting at, I've just seen the movie collections of people who buy shit on a whim.
I figure the U.S. cellular market shows another side of poor decision making; most people just pay enough each month so that they never 'go over', rather than controlling themselves a little bit and only spending money on what they 'need' (presumably there is room for prices to go down, my theory is that they mostly don't because everyone has a cell phone anyway).
Slashdot Mirror
You said:
Go look at a specific size and/or brand of TV for the last 30 years. Go watch how little has actually changed. like I said, small resolution leaps, and such. Meanwhile, the price has remained very consistent with inflation regardless of things being cheaper to produce. Oh you will notice one thing though. The TV's actually got smaller when switched from a standard measurement to widescreen.
Meanwhile, over here in reality, prices have fallen in nominal dollars, plummeted in inflation adjusted dollars, and resolution has increased more than 4 fold (that's spatially). Sure, those things aren't as true in the 20" TV space, but no one cares, 35" TVs have become quite affordable.
You can probably use something like Virtuawin to force it off screen:
http://virtuawin.sourceforge.net/
What does price manipulation have to do with "tvs haven't changed in 30 years" being blatantly wrong?
I certainly agree that government should regulate corporations in a way that benefits people more than it benefits corporations, but I also don't see any corporations that have me over a barrel (so apparently I see the transactions that I enter into as beneficial). I guess next you should accuse me of having blinders on.
I sort of like that I don't have to get 3 friends to come help me move my LCD.
You could probably track down one of the Sony WEGA tvs if you are really willing to spend $2,500, I think they mostly skipped Sony's quality decline (but it won't do 1080p, and it will weigh at least half as much as you do, maybe more than you).
So double reply faux paus. Anyway, here is a list of prices that looks at least reasonable, and in 1982, a 26" CRT apparently cost at least $1,000:
http://www.tvhistory.tv/tv-prices.htm
So maybe I do need to resort to including inflation.
30 years ago, you could hardly buy a television that wasn't a CRT, and if you wanted something over 30", you had to be very prepared to bust out your wallet. Today, a 30" LCD costs $750 (or whatever, I'm probably within $250, which is fine when you consider that the 30 year old television probably cost $2,500, and those numbers don't bother to account for inflation).
You are delusional.
Sure, but 100 watts for a month is going to cost around $7, so if the PC in question happens to be a power hungry desktop, that $10 or $15 per month might be better applied to an upgraded cell phone plan or whatever.
Their website indicates that the PC needs and active internet connection, so I am pretty sure it won't, so for the purposes of this discussion, sleep pretty much means not on.
I'm not sure the MagicJack would work while your PC is in sleep mode...
Not everyone leaves their PC on all the time, and they might want to spend their dollars on some other phone service, rather than electricity.
I guess the biggest way it is different from a cell phone is that a cell phone uses a few watt hours a day (or less), whereas a desktop might use 2 or 3 kilowatt hours a day (but potentially quite a lot more).
Well, I'd be sort of pissed if I had to have the engine running in order to use the stereo.
Anyway, you consider it obvious that the device 'works with your computer', others might think that it 'works with your internet', in which case they have misunderstood the device, but not in a particularly egregious way (especially when there are VOIP bridges that are standalone).
You knead to take a brake, your loosing it.
You are reading awful narrowly, he doesn't mean "You have to leave your pc on all the time or the world will explode", he means "You have to leave your PC on if you want to make and receive calls".
With any luck, it will become economically stupid for people living in northern Minnesota to not put solar panels on their roof.
(It is already vaguely reasonable for people in sunny areas to do so)
Did they try hooking some bikes up to generators and setting them up at Lambeau?
When you say large, what do you mean? Like Alcoa, or something else?
A stylus should push impossible over to irritating.
Is Monty one of 'thes execs'?
It had better not be entirely voice operated.
Entertainingly, we are moving to ipv6 as quickly as possible.
I'd be a lot more comfortable with that if the justice system were perfect.
I eat delicious animals, but it is worth pointing out that plenty of animals die in the name of keeping grains and other produce clean and/or attractive.
People have also occasionally gotten angry enough with royalty that they have done things without worrying too much about laws.
Sorry to reply twice: Also, the idea might be to make Netflix less attractive, which makes (foregoing Netflix entirely and) purchasing more attractive.
I don't think it is overall a great idea or anything, but I doubt that they (WB) are actually going to lose money on the deal (they may incur an opportunity cost though).
I understand what you are getting at, I've just seen the movie collections of people who buy shit on a whim.
I figure the U.S. cellular market shows another side of poor decision making; most people just pay enough each month so that they never 'go over', rather than controlling themselves a little bit and only spending money on what they 'need' (presumably there is room for prices to go down, my theory is that they mostly don't because everyone has a cell phone anyway).