I voted too. I shorted Nintendo. I think that this is going to be an incredibly short-lived flash-in-the-pan gimmick that will go down in history as a *huge* mistake. I can't imagine anybody using that controller for more than 10 minutes before getting sick of it, quite honstly. Remember the infamous Power Glove?
Can anybody explain why this is a good thing? Right now, I make a telephone call on my cell phone. I get charged one flat monthly fee (that is pretty low). It really couldn't possibly be any simpler.
What's the point of doing the same thing, but with 14 different acronyms, none of which will work together perfectly?
I can't understand it. It appears that there are people like Zonk who are absolutely fucking insane when it comes to a stupid game box. Look back at the thousands of Slashdot "PS3 sucks, buy a Wii" articles over the past year or so. It's pretty remarkable considering they're just fucking toys. I can't explain it. I'm buying a PS3, and I'll have fun playing with it. I don't particularly care one way or another what other people are buying, since it won't have any impact, whatsoever, on me.
Reading some of this stuff (a LOT of it is from/.), you'd think this is a war over life and death, not over one piece of plastic Chinese crap vs. another piece of plastic Chinese crap. Some people must have some very, very empty lives... I feel bad for them.
Actually, yes. He's not even acknowledged by the parties, so that they don't give him any credibility as a authentic 3rd party candidate. Same thing. Coke and Pepsi never have and probably never will advertise opposing RC Cola. They just ignore it and pretend it's not there.
Sure, you can argue that in theory PS3 commercials may make people who were going to buy a 360 or Wii this holiday hold off for for a PS3. Is there really any substance to that idea?
Absolutely, there is. There's a history of doing that successfully in marketing. I haven't watched TV in many years, but I remember seeing TV ads a long time ago that were for cars, but showed no picture of the car, because it wasn't released yet. It would show a bumper, or a silhouette, or some tiny detail. It's about building excitement and hype. The PS3's will arrive shortly. There's no question about that. Apple is about the only major modern retail manufacturer that honestly cannot keep up with production (primarily because they don't have any good manufacturing people on staff). Sony will have the shelves full soon enough. This initial release and whatever marketing they are doing is just getting everybody excited so that they WILL fly off the shelves.
Marketing is like a joke. If you have to explain it to your audience, it's failed.
You sir, are clearly not in marketing, because you're 100% wrong. The goal of marketing is to get people to remember your product. If a marketing campaign is confusing, it may very well be successful, so long as the campaign and the product are memorable. This is Marketing 101.
It's a well-established, very basic business-school case study. Coke and Pepsi advertise only against each other, and only so that people think that there is really a choice, while the government pretends that there's not an oligopoly in place. It's like Republicans and Democrats. They both know that they have half of the market, they're both very happy with half of a huge market, and they'd both like to keep it that way. Coke and Pepsi don't market to get more customers. They have virtually 100% brand awareness at this point. They're doing it just to maintain the illusion of competition.
It won't happen. Way too many devices already out there that are dumb CD players.
Besides, if "they" do it, "they" are only the companies that sell that mainstream crap to the idiots, anyway. There'd be plenty of music left to listen to.
It's very simple. Don't buy DRM'ed music. There are these things called "CeeDees". They are often used to store music. You can buy these "CeeDees" at your local music store. You should try them some time. The only reason the scenario you described will happen is if everybody involved is too fat to get the ass out of their chairs, and can't get out to spend some of your money locally (which is a more important issue than "DRM", if you ask me).
Slashdot continues its editorial nosedive towards irrelevance as they now ignore their own FAQ!. I wasn't aware that there is a significant portion of the American Slashdot reading public that could understand Dutch. Interesting.
I don't ever plan to run 27 year old programs, and neither do a large amount of people
I disagree. There are tons and tons of old DOS programs that are still at work today in many, many businesses. I user several, myself, along with a few 16 bit programs. Not using something simply because it's old is pretty dumb. Do you just throw out old things once they get too old, even if they're still working?
Pick any random Linux distribution or *BSD and you will find many "30 year old programs"
Well that's a good argument, isn't it?
Stop being stupid - most 16 bit windows software does NOT run on windows XP.
Really? Are you just flat out lying in order to accomplish something, or are you really that clueless? Would you like to see a screenshot of what I have running right now, my intelligence-challenege little friend?
Backwards compatibility is one of Linux's strong points
Do you have an example of a 27 year old program that can run on a current install of Ubuntu, without having to do anything else? I'm looking at Visicalc on Windows XP Professional right now.
I can run the original Visicalc on Windows XP Pro. Can you name one 27 year old program that you can run on a Mac? I know you can't do that on Linux without having to re-compile, which isn't at all acceptable for end-users.
Prototypes are nice... but do they actually work? I'm very skeptical that this thing can be produced at this price. I'll believe it when a factory is cranking out a few thousand a day, AND THEY WORK. Until then, it's nothing but vapor and PR.
Sun has made some of the worst strategic decisions in the IT industry for the past decade or so. Why would GPL'ing their main products be any better? Where are they going to make money? Bake sales? Are they going to pay their people with warm fuzzy feelings? Yeah, Sun may do it. But I'm betting it'll kill them long term. In fact, now may be a good time to short the stock, and expect the payoff to be complete in about 5 years.
GPL'ing a product has NEVER been successful for the company or person owning it. This won't be any different.
Oh, and regarding ownership of real property: Get Real! There are already many limitations on the right to own property. Can you buy the mineral rights under your house? Can you buy a slave? Can you legally own drugs without a prescription? Can you own guns with no restrictions?
So you think that MORE restrictions are a good idea? Sure. Tell people that they don't own the art they create, and how much art are you gonna get? What is the quality of what you're gonna get? Maybe we should pass some more laws, because god knows, that's what we need... more laws, and less personal freedom. Let's take away the ability of people to be able to own anything. (Hint: It's been tried many times, and it never works).
So let's say that getting rid of copyright is a good idea... Would you like to see people who don't want to give it up imprisoned, tortured, or killed? All 3 maybe? Should we have SWAT teams that break into people's houses and sieze private property? How much power do you really want to give our government over what you are allowed to own?
Whether downloading is illegal or not ignores the real question, which is does it help artists and should it be illegal?
Wrong. The question should be about respecting private property of all kinds, no matter who it belongs to. The alternative is a slippery slope on which the government tells you what you are allowed and aren't allowed to own.
No, you're right it isn't difficult. But you made the point yourself... it's not worth your (or my) time to do this. So, by definition, any of the Linux-based solutions out there are going to force us to actually go *backwards* in terms of functionality. It isn't cost effective for me to save a few hundred bucks a year, but then have to spend that much more time on payroll. It just doesn't make sense, unless one believes that Linux in and of itself, is an end worth more than $xxxx or xx hours of time. I don't believe that. It sounds like you don't either.
But that was my point. There are no options right now, unless you're willing to spend more time/money than you currently are. I'm just not nearly wealthy enough to be able to sacrifice my time and money for something as idealistic as OSS.
Dude, this is article is for the general public. The general public does not know, and does not care what the difference is. It's accurate enough for this audience.
The IT community is incredibly myopic in they seem to think that what is important to them is important to the rest of the world. Other groups of people tend to be a lot more realistic in their views of the world, in that they understand that what is important to them is not necessarily what's important to other people.
Slashdot Mirror
It'll happen when broadband becomes as ubiquitous and as reliable as electricity. We have a loooong way to go before that happens.
Nah, it's just national. I had no idea that this had anything to do with international calls. Canada is about as international as my phone calls get.
I voted too. I shorted Nintendo. I think that this is going to be an incredibly short-lived flash-in-the-pan gimmick that will go down in history as a *huge* mistake. I can't imagine anybody using that controller for more than 10 minutes before getting sick of it, quite honstly. Remember the infamous Power Glove?
Is price even a bonus? I've got an unlimited Net connection on my phone, and it's bundled in the price I pay, already.
Can anybody explain why this is a good thing? Right now, I make a telephone call on my cell phone. I get charged one flat monthly fee (that is pretty low). It really couldn't possibly be any simpler.
What's the point of doing the same thing, but with 14 different acronyms, none of which will work together perfectly?
I can't understand it. It appears that there are people like Zonk who are absolutely fucking insane when it comes to a stupid game box. Look back at the thousands of Slashdot "PS3 sucks, buy a Wii" articles over the past year or so. It's pretty remarkable considering they're just fucking toys. I can't explain it. I'm buying a PS3, and I'll have fun playing with it. I don't particularly care one way or another what other people are buying, since it won't have any impact, whatsoever, on me.
/.), you'd think this is a war over life and death, not over one piece of plastic Chinese crap vs. another piece of plastic Chinese crap. Some people must have some very, very empty lives... I feel bad for them.
Reading some of this stuff (a LOT of it is from
Actually, yes. He's not even acknowledged by the parties, so that they don't give him any credibility as a authentic 3rd party candidate. Same thing. Coke and Pepsi never have and probably never will advertise opposing RC Cola. They just ignore it and pretend it's not there.
Sure, you can argue that in theory PS3 commercials may make people who were going to buy a 360 or Wii this holiday hold off for for a PS3. Is there really any substance to that idea?
Absolutely, there is. There's a history of doing that successfully in marketing. I haven't watched TV in many years, but I remember seeing TV ads a long time ago that were for cars, but showed no picture of the car, because it wasn't released yet. It would show a bumper, or a silhouette, or some tiny detail. It's about building excitement and hype. The PS3's will arrive shortly. There's no question about that. Apple is about the only major modern retail manufacturer that honestly cannot keep up with production (primarily because they don't have any good manufacturing people on staff). Sony will have the shelves full soon enough. This initial release and whatever marketing they are doing is just getting everybody excited so that they WILL fly off the shelves.
Marketing is like a joke. If you have to explain it to your audience, it's failed.
You sir, are clearly not in marketing, because you're 100% wrong. The goal of marketing is to get people to remember your product. If a marketing campaign is confusing, it may very well be successful, so long as the campaign and the product are memorable. This is Marketing 101.
It's a well-established, very basic business-school case study. Coke and Pepsi advertise only against each other, and only so that people think that there is really a choice, while the government pretends that there's not an oligopoly in place. It's like Republicans and Democrats. They both know that they have half of the market, they're both very happy with half of a huge market, and they'd both like to keep it that way. Coke and Pepsi don't market to get more customers. They have virtually 100% brand awareness at this point. They're doing it just to maintain the illusion of competition.
It won't happen. Way too many devices already out there that are dumb CD players.
Besides, if "they" do it, "they" are only the companies that sell that mainstream crap to the idiots, anyway. There'd be plenty of music left to listen to.
It's very simple. Don't buy DRM'ed music. There are these things called "CeeDees". They are often used to store music. You can buy these "CeeDees" at your local music store. You should try them some time. The only reason the scenario you described will happen is if everybody involved is too fat to get the ass out of their chairs, and can't get out to spend some of your money locally (which is a more important issue than "DRM", if you ask me).
Slashdot continues its editorial nosedive towards irrelevance as they now ignore their own FAQ!. I wasn't aware that there is a significant portion of the American Slashdot reading public that could understand Dutch. Interesting.
I don't ever plan to run 27 year old programs, and neither do a large amount of people
I disagree. There are tons and tons of old DOS programs that are still at work today in many, many businesses. I user several, myself, along with a few 16 bit programs. Not using something simply because it's old is pretty dumb. Do you just throw out old things once they get too old, even if they're still working?
No need. The whole program is 27K.
http://www.bricklin.com/history/vclicense.htm
Pick any random Linux distribution or *BSD and you will find many "30 year old programs"
Well that's a good argument, isn't it?
Stop being stupid - most 16 bit windows software does NOT run on windows XP.
Really? Are you just flat out lying in order to accomplish something, or are you really that clueless? Would you like to see a screenshot of what I have running right now, my intelligence-challenege little friend?
Backwards compatibility is one of Linux's strong points
Do you have an example of a 27 year old program that can run on a current install of Ubuntu, without having to do anything else? I'm looking at Visicalc on Windows XP Professional right now.
I can run the original Visicalc on Windows XP Pro. Can you name one 27 year old program that you can run on a Mac? I know you can't do that on Linux without having to re-compile, which isn't at all acceptable for end-users.
Do people really think Windows does a good job with backward compatibility?
Absolutely. Probably the best in the industry. You can still run Visicalc on any Windows machine.
Prototypes are nice... but do they actually work? I'm very skeptical that this thing can be produced at this price. I'll believe it when a factory is cranking out a few thousand a day, AND THEY WORK. Until then, it's nothing but vapor and PR.
Sun has made some of the worst strategic decisions in the IT industry for the past decade or so. Why would GPL'ing their main products be any better? Where are they going to make money? Bake sales? Are they going to pay their people with warm fuzzy feelings? Yeah, Sun may do it. But I'm betting it'll kill them long term. In fact, now may be a good time to short the stock, and expect the payoff to be complete in about 5 years.
GPL'ing a product has NEVER been successful for the company or person owning it. This won't be any different.
Oh, and regarding ownership of real property: Get Real! There are already many limitations on the right to own property. Can you buy the mineral rights under your house? Can you buy a slave? Can you legally own drugs without a prescription? Can you own guns with no restrictions?
So you think that MORE restrictions are a good idea? Sure. Tell people that they don't own the art they create, and how much art are you gonna get? What is the quality of what you're gonna get? Maybe we should pass some more laws, because god knows, that's what we need... more laws, and less personal freedom. Let's take away the ability of people to be able to own anything. (Hint: It's been tried many times, and it never works).
So let's say that getting rid of copyright is a good idea... Would you like to see people who don't want to give it up imprisoned, tortured, or killed? All 3 maybe? Should we have SWAT teams that break into people's houses and sieze private property? How much power do you really want to give our government over what you are allowed to own?
Whether downloading is illegal or not ignores the real question, which is does it help artists and should it be illegal?
Wrong. The question should be about respecting private property of all kinds, no matter who it belongs to. The alternative is a slippery slope on which the government tells you what you are allowed and aren't allowed to own.
No, you're right it isn't difficult. But you made the point yourself... it's not worth your (or my) time to do this. So, by definition, any of the Linux-based solutions out there are going to force us to actually go *backwards* in terms of functionality. It isn't cost effective for me to save a few hundred bucks a year, but then have to spend that much more time on payroll. It just doesn't make sense, unless one believes that Linux in and of itself, is an end worth more than $xxxx or xx hours of time. I don't believe that. It sounds like you don't either.
But that was my point. There are no options right now, unless you're willing to spend more time/money than you currently are. I'm just not nearly wealthy enough to be able to sacrifice my time and money for something as idealistic as OSS.
Dude, this is article is for the general public. The general public does not know, and does not care what the difference is. It's accurate enough for this audience.
The IT community is incredibly myopic in they seem to think that what is important to them is important to the rest of the world. Other groups of people tend to be a lot more realistic in their views of the world, in that they understand that what is important to them is not necessarily what's important to other people.