You're referring to Process Explorer and yes, this was its behavior.
It was fixed, however, in version 11.0.
The version of SecuROM that comes with Armed Assault, S.T.A.L.K.E.R (European release only), Neverwinter Nights 2, Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars (patched to v1.04), Tomb Raider Anniversary (demo and full version), Overlord, BioShock (demo and full version), Hellgate: London (single player mode), Rayman Raving Rabbids (PC version), World in Conflict (single-player campaign only) and Spore (full game and Creature Creator) prevents the game from running at all if older versions (before v11) of Process Explorer, a free tool by Sysinternals/Microsoft, has been run since the previous reboot. However, a workaround for this SecuROM detection bug (v9.25 is not affected) can be found here. Microsoft has worked around this particular bug with Process Explorer v11.0. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Securom#Known_problems
1) Get yourself noticed and promoted within your own company. I got hired about five years back doing bullshit scripting work when I wanted to do real coding. I broke out an IDE and wrote a program which automated my own job. This got me promoted and gave me the springboard to get a new, better job outside the company.
2) If you can't get promoted (and, Devil's Advocate here, let's say you really do just work for a douche of a company and so #1 above wouldn't work) then just keep applying everywhere you can. You're in a bad spot but at some point some company will take a chance on you. You'll probably be doing something lame like scripting or COBOL but at least it won't be tech support.
3) Consider moving - I hate to say it but since you're not saying where you are, the answer might be to start applying at companies in other cities, preferrably big ones. If you live in Dallas or Chicago you'll have plenty of chances to get on board somewhere. If you're in Oconomowoc, WI you might have the best paying gig in town already.
4) Start a side consulting business - there's plenty of people out there who will hire someone for an affordable rate. If you're potentially good at what you want to find a job doing, set up a DBA (Doing Business As) for yourself, like Joe Blow Consulting, then get side contract gigs. Don't charge much at first. Heck, find someone like a local church and do their website for free, then use that on your resume to get a better gig, like doing a website for a locally run restaraunt. At some point this will be a great thing to put on your resume and get a leg up in the hiring process.
I don't get it.
If I buy one I pay $19.99 per can.
If I buy two, considering your limited offer, I pay $19.99 + half a cent per can. It's more expensive.
If you want to sell snake oil, at least make sense in a mathematical way.
WHOOSH!!!
That's the sound of the joke flying above your head as it goes by.
Wanna play Halo 2? Get an XBOX. Wanna play Eternal Darkness? Get a gamecube. Wanna play Castlevania ? Get a PS2.
And yet the fact that a single console is priced less than a good PC video card is often toted as an advantage for the consoles. But once you factor in the price of buying all the consoles this point is negated.
Now that it is even more obvious that Thompson is a nutcase, who is going to take his place? Someone competent in that role? That is a scary thought.
People always say this (usually with the added "we're lucky to have Jack Thompson" like Penny Arcade did) and I see why they do but I have two issues with it.
The average non-gamer person doesn't look at Jack Thompson and say "oh wow he's crazy" they say "oh wow he's a lawyer and well spoken and, gee, I've always thought maybe these video game things were bad for you". Yes, his letter to the dude's mom calling the guy a Hitler Youth was insane. Yes, the Word document was over the top. The average person has never heard of either of those, they just see Jack Thompson on CNN (yeah, I know CNN is moving away from using him) and they see how he very calmly and rationally says a bunch of stuff that people want to believe and the people they bring on to oppose him do NOT have their shit together and they get annihilated. But if JT gets disbarred, his credibility goes away. He becomes someone who is no longer smart enough to be a lawyer. He becomes Fred Phelps where people say "well he was disbarred for a reason probably"
The other prong is people saying "well if the next person to take up a crusade against video games is not insane then we have a problem". I don't believe there will ever not be a person with a crusade that is not insane because: there is nothing wrong with video games. Yes, there is a line at which things can go too far. You know what? The game industry regulates itself. No console maker will allow an AO-rated game on their console. Even M-rated games have to "auditon" to be on consoles. And even on the PC where it is, in theory, an untamed land, the industry regulates itself. Games with bad overtones are taken out and beaten. Like those white supremacist games, or JFK Reloaded (which, for the record, I liked).
Gamers are not stupid. And people are not stupid. We need to stop treating people like they are stupid and when they demonstrate ignorance, educate them. Yes, there are games out there where you rape women. Guess what? They're from Japan where this is perfectly legal. They're not in stores. Your kids are not buying them at GameStop. If they're downloading them off of BitTorrent then that's your issue to regulate. Yes, you murder people in GTA4. Guess what? Your kids aren't supposed to be playing that game. If they are then either you're not doing your job as a parent or - more likely - it's impossible to keep your kids sheltered at all times. It's OK. They're going to play a video game. They're going to see some naked breasts in a magazine. They're going to drink a beer before they're 21. It probably won't kill them. And if you outlaw video games then the kids will watch porn, and if you outlaw porn then the kids will read dirty books, and if you outlaw dirty books then the kids will spank it to the lingere section of the Sears Catalog. And if you ban that they'll just make shit up. Stop treating your kids like they're non-functional retards and life will be better.
1. The Simpsons voice actors are highly paid because they fought tooth and nail for over a decade to be that way. Fox underpaid them considerably for a long time, even threatening to replace them because "who could tell the difference?" and going so far as to kill off Maude Flanders when they could not reach an agreement with the voice actress over pay (the actress had a long commute and wanted extra to compensate her travel expenses). Fox has never had that many popular shows and so they desperately need to hang on to The Simpsons so they keep the actors well paid and happy now, but it wasn't always that way.
By your own analogy, this actor should be paid for sequel work, but since we know the GTA franchise is like the Final Fantasy franchise in that the characters and settings do not get reused, this won't happen.
2. The Simpsons voice actors are part of the winning formula. The cast of Friends pulled off a million dollars per episode each at the end of their run. Any one of a hundred Eastern European voice actors could have admirably done the same job as this guy probably. He was an unknown prior to this game. The Simpsons voice actors pull off salaries because they're somebodies.
I should have said "B-list actor" or "actor with less distinguished voice" instead of "unknown actor". And yes, the use of people like Billy Crystal, Tom Hanks and Samuel L Jackson throw this theory off (though, in the case of Toy Story, they hadn't thought of this idea yet).
Case in point: ANTZ. That movie, which went up against A Bug's Life, used people like Gene Hackman and Sylvester Stallone for the voice acting. They have such distinctive voices that you didn't pay attention to the movie, you pictured Stallone in the studio recording his lines. But the entire time I watched A Bug's Life I had no idea it was Kevin Spacey. Or Dave Foley. When the Incredibles trailer came out, no one could figure out who Mr. Incredible's voice was, not one person guessed it was Craig T. Nelson.
If Rockstar had hired Al Pacino or someone similar to do the voice acting they would have distracted their audience considerably.
If this was television, film, or radio, Hollick and the other GTA actors could have made millions by now.
Simple, this is not television, film, or radio. You, as actors, are not what is driving this vehicle. People play these games because they want to play GTA4. If the character was mute and you had to read text (as is the case with a number of other games) the game would feel different but I think it would have sold just as well.
Contrast that to movies or television where people go to see movies and watch television shows because of the actors and actresses involved. People will go to see a movie with Angelina Jolie in it because she's so damn hot and the studios know this so they hire her, and she knows this so she charges $20M.
Now to this guy's credit as near as I can tell he's not saying "I was robbed and deceived", he's just saying "gee, I was the main actor in a game which has made $500M, it would be nice if I had been paid more." With all due respect, you didn't get paid more because you're a nobody. I'm not trying to be mean - but you're not George Clooney, you're someone who did soap operas to this point. You did an excellent job, and you were helped by the "Pixar Effect" of using a high quality but unknown actor to avoid distractions. But you were paid the amount you were because you're an unknown. Heck, you got paid a lot more than the average person does in a year, and I doubt this was the only gig you had. If they ever make a sequel to this game and reuse your character (unlikely, since like the Final Fantasy franchise they change characters and settings entirely from game to game) then renegotiate for more money. But in the meantime, just enjoy the fame and likelihood of getting future work.
But you're still comparing programs written in different timetables (2003 vs. 2007) and programs aimed at different people (developers vs. average users). Are you saying that once a particular "look" is established that no one should ever change it? Are you saying that the average user should have to put up with menus and button bars in programs that don't need it?
I'll concede that Expression having a different UI is sort of dumb but the others I think are fine.
You have to be joking right? Yes, some programs have different UI's than others because some programs have different needs than others. So you compare a program from Office 2003, Visio (the version in Office 2007 is essentially the same one as the one in 2003) with a program from Office 2007. Are you saying that programs can't innovate? You're comparing programs that do useful things versus... Notepad. Seriously? You're comparing a web browser with a media player with a messaging client with development tools and you're shocked at how they're not all identical? Or are you noting how they don't all have that same "frame" because from where I stand... they do.
Apple also has a single digit market share. Microsoft gives people what they want, or what they think they want, and Microsoft dominates. This has its problems of course (things get confusing when you try and please everyone) but the Macintosh's tiny market share reflects the byproduct of Apple's thinking.
Should everyone think less of JFK if he was a furry porn freak?
Should they? No. Would they? Uhh... yeah.
J. Edgar Hoover has been rumored to have been a cross-dresser and it basically ruined his image forever. Nevermind that apparently it's not true, people just accept it to be true and that's basically the same thing (especially since people tend to take Wikipedia as gospel these days). It was even featured in one of the Naked Gun movies (people tend to take what's in a movie as the gospel as well).
Now the J. Edgar Hoover thing is just a rumor and those are hard or impossible to stop or curtail (like the rumors that Lincoln was gay but in the case of stuff you can stop, I think you should. If the person that is the subject of this article is a furry (hypothetically, there's nothing about the story to suggest it, we're just throwing "what if?"s out there) it's one thing if everyone in town knows he's a furry, but it's another thing entirely if no one (outside of people who knew him by his Internet handle) knew it. Might as well keep that a secret, especially since, like the poster said, it would just be rubbing salt in the wounds.
Yes, it would be wonderful if everyone could just accept what other people do but it would in all likelihood just upset the family more. It's like when you go to your grandfather's funeral and they go on and on about the good things he did, like build a treehouse for the local kids or how he taught Sunday School. They don't mention how most people thought he was an overbearing asshole and that he referred to anyone non-white by their corresponding racial slur. In their immediate death, you just focus on the positive aspects of their life.
Yeah you're right, but I just meant that the 9/11 joke in Postal was waaaay more over the top than Family Guy (whose jokes centered on Guiliani). But yeah, being offended to the point of thinking he should not be making movies any more is more of a "ammo for the argument" thing.
Calling him out for 9/11 jokes is a bit unfair, as he's hardly the only one who's made them-- for example Family Guy has at least a dozen per season.
True, but Family Guy never featured a scene of a janitor in one of the WTC towers looking out of the window two seconds before the plane hit and destroyed him. Or at least that's what was in the trailers. That takes it a bit far, IMO.
To be fair, anyone who gets into a ring with another person set on a competition of combat prowess, for what ever reason, should be there to fight. Charity or not, they are fighting.
I can't find his exact quote but Lowtax, one of the four that fought, was apparently told that this was just all a big gag and that Boll wasn't taking it seriously. Lowtax got beat up pretty bad and reports that two of the other fighters continued to get punched by Boll even after it was clear that they were injured and no longer in any shape to continue the fight. That's not fighting, that's revenge.
True, it wasn't the best idea for these critics to get in the ring in the first place but Boll is a complete scumbag, even by fighting standards.
Having never seen a Uwe Boll movie, can someone tell me what's so bad about him?
-His movies are bad. Really, universally accepted as terrible.
-He keeps getting handed video game franchises to make movies out of, which is problematic because video game fans hate to see their favorite franchises turned into crappy movies, but it has further reaching implications in that it states, essentially, that the movie industry has no respect for the video game industry since they keep letting this man make shitty movies (that lose money, no less)
-His initial career was only made possible due to a loophole in German tax law which allowed him to spend other people's money on his bad movies since they could write off the loss for tax purposes. Once that loophole was closed, he decided to stop making expensive ($1M+) movies
-He's quite arrogant and usually pretty angry (which you might be too if people kept shitting on your movies
-He lured critcs out to a charity fight and then beat the snot out of them, sending one to the hospital
On a deeper level, whereas people like you and me have to work our asses off, he's rich off his no-talent works because of a (now closed) loophole. He wipes his asses with video game franchises (the Postal movie actually made 9/11 jokes) and he's a pretty despicable human being (see the Wired article above).
iirc Moore manipulated Charlton Heston into saying something which could be seen as racist
Not exactly, Moore asked Heston why he thought that other countries with guns, like Canada, don't have the level of violence the USA does and Heston said he thought one of the reasons was that Canada doesn't have our mixed ethnicity. Moore asks him to clarify that statement and Heston backpedals from it. Shortly thereafter he ends the interview and just walks off.
Moore didn't seek out to paint Heston as a racist but essentially what happened there is that Heston fucked up. He misspoke (he probably meant that Canada didn't have quite the race relations issues we've faced in America) and instead of fixing it, he decided to end the interview. He was probably sitting there realizing that doing this interview without anyone from his camp present was a bad idea and decided to just end it there before he did more damage. For that matter, within a year of the movie's release he came out with the Alzheimer's announcement and I think that he was starting to feel an episode come on and got out before things started to get bad (I'm guessing, I don't know how Alzheimer's works exactly). You'll notice at the beginning of the interview he is quite confident and at the end he's puttering away like a cranky old man.
Basically, Moore was trying to portray him as a gun nut and what cinched it was the "COLD DEAD HANDS!!!" line at a rally once. This is something he was criticized for - apparently the "President" of the NRA is a symbolic figurehead. The position that Heston filled was not a decision maker, he was more the public face. However, the "COLD DEAD HANDS" bit was, from what I hear, even criticized within the NRA.
The NRA, as an organization to promote responsible gun ownership is a respectable organization. The NRA, as an organization to lobby congress and make sure every American can have as many guns as they want, be able to use hollow point bullets, and hunt deer using an AK-47, is an organization which has lost its way. Heston did some great things in his life but his theatrics didn't help the NRA these last several years.
those snippets were actually spliced together from several different rallies
I always hear about this but I've always had a hard time believing that most people failed to notice the different suit, backdrop, camera angles, etc. People believe Moore was trying to imply that the "COLD DEAD HANDS!!!" line came from the Denver rally, but he was really using it as a method of introducing Heston to the film and portraying the sort of theatrics Heston employed in his years as President of the NRA.
Dell will also outsource more PC manufacturing to partners, he said.
That sounds to me more like they're going to let other companies manufacture their stuff for them. Like you said, Dell already outsources all of their manufacturing, so this just sounds like a shift rather than "DEY TUUK ERR JAAAHBS"
My Slashdot-fu fails me but I seem to recall, circa 2002, an article almost exactly like this, but the speculation was on "Longhorn" (i.e., Vista). The predictions, the most notable of which was that Longhorn would completely break all compatibility with everything that came prior, was pretty much identical. Then, as now, it seemed like the single stupidest idea ever. And then, as now, it was in an article using no sources on what was essentially a blog. And then, as now, the Slashdot submitter posted it as if it was the Gospel and the first several submitters carried it as if it was going to be the death blow to Microsoft they needed. Then someone (like yourself) clued in that this is just something that some blogger pulled out of his ass.
And the best part about the circa-2002 article was that either in that post or on another post on the site the author railed on about how you can be a 40-something programmer and lose out on a job to a 28-year-old programmer because the 28-year-old has "social skills" and you don't and don't want to because if you wanted to have "social skills" you would not have become a programmer in the first place. His "about" page revealed that he was a 40-something programmer, complete with a laughably awful photo of him, morbidly obese, sitting in front of his PC.
So essentially this was a bitter old man making a bunch of shit up. I'd almost guess that this "betaguy" is the same person with some better web design skills.
I think you misunderstood the intent of the summary/headline. The issue is not that there won't be a 32-bit version for Windows or that there won't be a version for Macintosh (that would be suicide). The issue is that the 64-bit version of Photoshop, an app which could really use the extra muscle and RAM of a 64-bit machine, is going to be Windows-only because Apple hasn't gotten their shit together yet.
Slashdot Mirror
You're referring to Process Explorer and yes, this was its behavior.
It was fixed, however, in version 11.0.
The version of SecuROM that comes with Armed Assault, S.T.A.L.K.E.R (European release only), Neverwinter Nights 2, Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars (patched to v1.04), Tomb Raider Anniversary (demo and full version), Overlord, BioShock (demo and full version), Hellgate: London (single player mode), Rayman Raving Rabbids (PC version), World in Conflict (single-player campaign only) and Spore (full game and Creature Creator) prevents the game from running at all if older versions (before v11) of Process Explorer, a free tool by Sysinternals/Microsoft, has been run since the previous reboot. However, a workaround for this SecuROM detection bug (v9.25 is not affected) can be found here. Microsoft has worked around this particular bug with Process Explorer v11.0.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Securom#Known_problems
You could just call your buddies on the phone then...
I see some ways out of your situation:
1) Get yourself noticed and promoted within your own company. I got hired about five years back doing bullshit scripting work when I wanted to do real coding. I broke out an IDE and wrote a program which automated my own job. This got me promoted and gave me the springboard to get a new, better job outside the company.
2) If you can't get promoted (and, Devil's Advocate here, let's say you really do just work for a douche of a company and so #1 above wouldn't work) then just keep applying everywhere you can. You're in a bad spot but at some point some company will take a chance on you. You'll probably be doing something lame like scripting or COBOL but at least it won't be tech support.
3) Consider moving - I hate to say it but since you're not saying where you are, the answer might be to start applying at companies in other cities, preferrably big ones. If you live in Dallas or Chicago you'll have plenty of chances to get on board somewhere. If you're in Oconomowoc, WI you might have the best paying gig in town already.
4) Start a side consulting business - there's plenty of people out there who will hire someone for an affordable rate. If you're potentially good at what you want to find a job doing, set up a DBA (Doing Business As) for yourself, like Joe Blow Consulting, then get side contract gigs. Don't charge much at first. Heck, find someone like a local church and do their website for free, then use that on your resume to get a better gig, like doing a website for a locally run restaraunt. At some point this will be a great thing to put on your resume and get a leg up in the hiring process.
WHOOSH!!!
That's the sound of the joke flying above your head as it goes by.
And yet the fact that a single console is priced less than a good PC video card is often toted as an advantage for the consoles. But once you factor in the price of buying all the consoles this point is negated.
...because Dave Perry is a God-Damned Idiot
People always say this (usually with the added "we're lucky to have Jack Thompson" like Penny Arcade did) and I see why they do but I have two issues with it.
Gamers are not stupid. And people are not stupid. We need to stop treating people like they are stupid and when they demonstrate ignorance, educate them. Yes, there are games out there where you rape women. Guess what? They're from Japan where this is perfectly legal. They're not in stores. Your kids are not buying them at GameStop. If they're downloading them off of BitTorrent then that's your issue to regulate. Yes, you murder people in GTA4. Guess what? Your kids aren't supposed to be playing that game. If they are then either you're not doing your job as a parent or - more likely - it's impossible to keep your kids sheltered at all times. It's OK. They're going to play a video game. They're going to see some naked breasts in a magazine. They're going to drink a beer before they're 21. It probably won't kill them. And if you outlaw video games then the kids will watch porn, and if you outlaw porn then the kids will read dirty books, and if you outlaw dirty books then the kids will spank it to the lingere section of the Sears Catalog. And if you ban that they'll just make shit up. Stop treating your kids like they're non-functional retards and life will be better.
No dude, they're children. Youngling is just the title of their rank.
Two responses:
1. The Simpsons voice actors are highly paid because they fought tooth and nail for over a decade to be that way. Fox underpaid them considerably for a long time, even threatening to replace them because "who could tell the difference?" and going so far as to kill off Maude Flanders when they could not reach an agreement with the voice actress over pay (the actress had a long commute and wanted extra to compensate her travel expenses). Fox has never had that many popular shows and so they desperately need to hang on to The Simpsons so they keep the actors well paid and happy now, but it wasn't always that way.
By your own analogy, this actor should be paid for sequel work, but since we know the GTA franchise is like the Final Fantasy franchise in that the characters and settings do not get reused, this won't happen.
2. The Simpsons voice actors are part of the winning formula. The cast of Friends pulled off a million dollars per episode each at the end of their run. Any one of a hundred Eastern European voice actors could have admirably done the same job as this guy probably. He was an unknown prior to this game. The Simpsons voice actors pull off salaries because they're somebodies.
I should have said "B-list actor" or "actor with less distinguished voice" instead of "unknown actor". And yes, the use of people like Billy Crystal, Tom Hanks and Samuel L Jackson throw this theory off (though, in the case of Toy Story, they hadn't thought of this idea yet).
Case in point: ANTZ. That movie, which went up against A Bug's Life, used people like Gene Hackman and Sylvester Stallone for the voice acting. They have such distinctive voices that you didn't pay attention to the movie, you pictured Stallone in the studio recording his lines. But the entire time I watched A Bug's Life I had no idea it was Kevin Spacey. Or Dave Foley. When the Incredibles trailer came out, no one could figure out who Mr. Incredible's voice was, not one person guessed it was Craig T. Nelson.
If Rockstar had hired Al Pacino or someone similar to do the voice acting they would have distracted their audience considerably.
Contrast that to movies or television where people go to see movies and watch television shows because of the actors and actresses involved. People will go to see a movie with Angelina Jolie in it because she's so damn hot and the studios know this so they hire her, and she knows this so she charges $20M.
Now to this guy's credit as near as I can tell he's not saying "I was robbed and deceived", he's just saying "gee, I was the main actor in a game which has made $500M, it would be nice if I had been paid more." With all due respect, you didn't get paid more because you're a nobody. I'm not trying to be mean - but you're not George Clooney, you're someone who did soap operas to this point. You did an excellent job, and you were helped by the "Pixar Effect" of using a high quality but unknown actor to avoid distractions. But you were paid the amount you were because you're an unknown. Heck, you got paid a lot more than the average person does in a year, and I doubt this was the only gig you had. If they ever make a sequel to this game and reuse your character (unlikely, since like the Final Fantasy franchise they change characters and settings entirely from game to game) then renegotiate for more money. But in the meantime, just enjoy the fame and likelihood of getting future work.
But you're still comparing programs written in different timetables (2003 vs. 2007) and programs aimed at different people (developers vs. average users). Are you saying that once a particular "look" is established that no one should ever change it? Are you saying that the average user should have to put up with menus and button bars in programs that don't need it?
I'll concede that Expression having a different UI is sort of dumb but the others I think are fine.
You have to be joking right? Yes, some programs have different UI's than others because some programs have different needs than others. So you compare a program from Office 2003, Visio (the version in Office 2007 is essentially the same one as the one in 2003) with a program from Office 2007. Are you saying that programs can't innovate? You're comparing programs that do useful things versus... Notepad. Seriously? You're comparing a web browser with a media player with a messaging client with development tools and you're shocked at how they're not all identical? Or are you noting how they don't all have that same "frame" because from where I stand... they do.
Now the J. Edgar Hoover thing is just a rumor and those are hard or impossible to stop or curtail (like the rumors that Lincoln was gay but in the case of stuff you can stop, I think you should. If the person that is the subject of this article is a furry (hypothetically, there's nothing about the story to suggest it, we're just throwing "what if?"s out there) it's one thing if everyone in town knows he's a furry, but it's another thing entirely if no one (outside of people who knew him by his Internet handle) knew it. Might as well keep that a secret, especially since, like the poster said, it would just be rubbing salt in the wounds.
Yes, it would be wonderful if everyone could just accept what other people do but it would in all likelihood just upset the family more. It's like when you go to your grandfather's funeral and they go on and on about the good things he did, like build a treehouse for the local kids or how he taught Sunday School. They don't mention how most people thought he was an overbearing asshole and that he referred to anyone non-white by their corresponding racial slur. In their immediate death, you just focus on the positive aspects of their life.
You would, of course, at the right price
Yeah you're right, but I just meant that the 9/11 joke in Postal was waaaay more over the top than Family Guy (whose jokes centered on Guiliani). But yeah, being offended to the point of thinking he should not be making movies any more is more of a "ammo for the argument" thing.
True, it wasn't the best idea for these critics to get in the ring in the first place but Boll is a complete scumbag, even by fighting standards.
- -His movies are bad. Really, universally accepted as terrible.
- -He keeps getting handed video game franchises to make movies out of, which is problematic because video game fans hate to see their favorite franchises turned into crappy movies, but it has further reaching implications in that it states, essentially, that the movie industry has no respect for the video game industry since they keep letting this man make shitty movies (that lose money, no less)
- -His initial career was only made possible due to a loophole in German tax law which allowed him to spend other people's money on his bad movies since they could write off the loss for tax purposes. Once that loophole was closed, he decided to stop making expensive ($1M+) movies
- -He's quite arrogant and usually pretty angry (which you might be too if people kept shitting on your movies
- -He lured critcs out to a charity fight and then beat the snot out of them, sending one to the hospital
On a deeper level, whereas people like you and me have to work our asses off, he's rich off his no-talent works because of a (now closed) loophole. He wipes his asses with video game franchises (the Postal movie actually made 9/11 jokes) and he's a pretty despicable human being (see the Wired article above).Moore didn't seek out to paint Heston as a racist but essentially what happened there is that Heston fucked up. He misspoke (he probably meant that Canada didn't have quite the race relations issues we've faced in America) and instead of fixing it, he decided to end the interview. He was probably sitting there realizing that doing this interview without anyone from his camp present was a bad idea and decided to just end it there before he did more damage. For that matter, within a year of the movie's release he came out with the Alzheimer's announcement and I think that he was starting to feel an episode come on and got out before things started to get bad (I'm guessing, I don't know how Alzheimer's works exactly). You'll notice at the beginning of the interview he is quite confident and at the end he's puttering away like a cranky old man.
Basically, Moore was trying to portray him as a gun nut and what cinched it was the "COLD DEAD HANDS!!!" line at a rally once. This is something he was criticized for - apparently the "President" of the NRA is a symbolic figurehead. The position that Heston filled was not a decision maker, he was more the public face. However, the "COLD DEAD HANDS" bit was, from what I hear, even criticized within the NRA.
The NRA, as an organization to promote responsible gun ownership is a respectable organization. The NRA, as an organization to lobby congress and make sure every American can have as many guns as they want, be able to use hollow point bullets, and hunt deer using an AK-47, is an organization which has lost its way. Heston did some great things in his life but his theatrics didn't help the NRA these last several years.
I always hear about this but I've always had a hard time believing that most people failed to notice the different suit, backdrop, camera angles, etc. People believe Moore was trying to imply that the "COLD DEAD HANDS!!!" line came from the Denver rally, but he was really using it as a method of introducing Heston to the film and portraying the sort of theatrics Heston employed in his years as President of the NRA.
My Slashdot-fu fails me but I seem to recall, circa 2002, an article almost exactly like this, but the speculation was on "Longhorn" (i.e., Vista). The predictions, the most notable of which was that Longhorn would completely break all compatibility with everything that came prior, was pretty much identical. Then, as now, it seemed like the single stupidest idea ever. And then, as now, it was in an article using no sources on what was essentially a blog. And then, as now, the Slashdot submitter posted it as if it was the Gospel and the first several submitters carried it as if it was going to be the death blow to Microsoft they needed. Then someone (like yourself) clued in that this is just something that some blogger pulled out of his ass.
And the best part about the circa-2002 article was that either in that post or on another post on the site the author railed on about how you can be a 40-something programmer and lose out on a job to a 28-year-old programmer because the 28-year-old has "social skills" and you don't and don't want to because if you wanted to have "social skills" you would not have become a programmer in the first place. His "about" page revealed that he was a 40-something programmer, complete with a laughably awful photo of him, morbidly obese, sitting in front of his PC.
So essentially this was a bitter old man making a bunch of shit up. I'd almost guess that this "betaguy" is the same person with some better web design skills.
I think you misunderstood the intent of the summary/headline. The issue is not that there won't be a 32-bit version for Windows or that there won't be a version for Macintosh (that would be suicide). The issue is that the 64-bit version of Photoshop, an app which could really use the extra muscle and RAM of a 64-bit machine, is going to be Windows-only because Apple hasn't gotten their shit together yet.