their failures have nothing to do their ideology and everything to do with the fact that banner ads just don't support a website unless they're porn ads.
But this is easily falsifiable. I've already mentioned WorldNetDaily, a publication that finances itself through banner ads. I read the site hourly to make sure that I am informed on what is going on in the world, and I can guarantee you that I have never seen a "porn ad." Not once. So your statement that banner ads can't support a website has been dealt with and dimissed.
I think what you mean to say is that banner ads can support a site if there are enough page views. You get page views by having scintillating content. You get them by publishing things that people want to read. People should not be surprised that they cannot generate page views with the horrors of liberalism! WorldNetDaily succeeds because there is a large audience of people who do not want their news sanitized for them, people who want the honest truth about the socialist and homosexual communities. The audience for the type of material served up by Salon, on the other hand, has dwindled into nothingness.
The primary reason that Salon and Slate and other "Web magazines" is not that there is something inherently wrong with the format. The problem is that people are starting to reject the content. Salon and Slate are well-known unapologetic mouthpieces of the liberal left, and poll after poll is showing that Americans are increasingly not interested in liberalism. With conservatives running the show in Washington, the country is beginning to gravitate back towards its moral roots. The few Americans that do admit to liberalism are not even close to the number that would be required to keep Salon afloat (through ad revenue or any other means.) If you have no readers, you cannot possibly succeed.
Take a look at WorldNetDaily, a popular mainstream news outlet/magazine. WND is consistently voted the best site on the Web, and is going strong even as leftist sites crumble down around it. The point is that Web journalism is alive and well (and in fact, doing better than it ever has done before.) The fact that some of the old standbys are dying out is just a natural part of information evolution; it is the wheat being separated from the chaff.
True, but that does not mean the people have to buy it.
I didn't say that they did. If there was another American company that offered similar software and services, people could buy that. That's not the point. The point is that Wurzler is essentially rewarding people for using an OS whose socioeconomic philosophy is decidedly un-American. On Memorial Day, I find it indefensible to be celebrating the basic ideas that hundreds of thousands of American servicemen have given their lives to defend the country against.
No, I'm not trying to be funny. I'm just sick and tired of the liberal elite position of "bash the military" and "screw the veterans." I am proud to say that I answered my country's call in Operation Desert Storm, as did thousands of other brave Americans. I interpret Wurzler's inexcusable bias against Microsoft as a swipe at American values and at the things that this country stands for. I also have the right to free speech, as afforded me by the United States constitution. If you don't like it, tough titty (as the kitty is reputed to have said.)
It seems to me that Wurlzer has fallen victim to some of the FUD that has been spread by Linux advocates. Despite what these people say, most of the crap that they've been flinging around is just plain baseless. I'll be called a "Microsoft shill" or an "astroturfer", but truth is truth: Microsoft's latest server offerings are extremely secure, scalable, and reliable. It seems to me that a lot of these OSS advocates have this "Windows 3.1" mentality about Microsoft. Windows advocates are willing to admit that Linux has gotten better over the years.. why aren't Linux advocates prepared to admit the same thing about Microsoft?
Look, if you want to use Linux or *BSD or some other non-mainstream OS to host your Web site, then great. That's your choice. But what Wurzler is doing here is essentially punishing people (fining them, as it were) for making a responsible choice to use the products and services offered by one of America's most important flagship companies. The way that America works is that people get together and work hard to put out a product, and then they sell it to people. It is particularly sickening that this news is being reported on Memorial Day, the day that we are supposed to be remembering the sacrifices that our servicemen gave for our way of life. The Wurzler bozos might as well spit in the collective faces of all of our country's veterans of war.
Has anybody considered holding Congressional oversight meetings on these people? It's interesting how they are unwilling to increase premiums on Linux users to deal with security issues and source code forking and the other (very real) risks of using this OS. Instead, what they do is punish people for making the choice that has been proven time and time again to lower the total cost of ownership. Go ahead and flame me.. I'm just sick of the blatant anti-Microsoft bias that Slashdot displays time and time again.
All right, how is Linux "targeted primarily at political leftists?"
Well, maybe this was a bit strongly-worded. But it doesn't take a world-renowned detective to figure out that a lot of the hard-line, anti-corporate, Seattle-protester types are big into Linux. This does not help Linux's public image, IMHO. On top of that, there was the unfortunate (and IMHO hateful) story that Slashdot ran about how Linux was supposed to become the offical OS of the People's Republic of China.
As I write this we can all be thankful that our servicemen are on their way home from China. But I have to admit that I felt a bit guilty booting into Linux, knowing that those innocent people were being held hostage, while at the same time I was using their captors' favorite OS without giving it a second thought. I know this is silly; "one thing has nothing to do with the other", as they say.. but still, there was some sort of primal guilt that I was powerless to overcome. I keep telling myself that using Linux is not going to turn me into a leftist, but some irrational part of me (that part of the brain that invents monsters under the bed, no doubt) is working overtime to convince me otherwise.
At any rate, you're right.. I should have left the comment out altogether. It doesn't change my basic position, though. Linux is a serious OS, and anybody that has ever used it is well aware of that. We need to be doing whatever is possible to reinforce its image as a serious OS. Gaming news doesn't help that goal (IMHO.)
Okay, you're right. When I said "these games" I really meant "a lot of the other games that have been released for Linux." I didn't mean to suggest that Tribes 2 was old.. apologies if I implied otherwise (and reading what I wrote, I did.)
But for an example of what I mean by "a lot of the other games", take DOOM. There was a big hubbub about id Software releasing and opening up DOOM for Linux, and this was years after the height of its popularity. Again, don't get me wrong.. DOOM was a great game, perhaps among the best ever, but Joe Sixpack is going to get the wrong impression from this. IMHO we don't need this.
I've never understood why people go for PC gaming anyway.. isn't that what a console, a big-screen TV, and 600 watts of Surround Sound are for?
Am I the only one that is not necessarily pleased by this whole "games for Linux" phenomenon? In my opinion, news like this actually hurts Linux, for at least a couple of reasons:
1) These games are old. Sorry, but Alpha Centauri? Look, you don't need to convince me it was a great game, but the key word there is "was!" When people on the street see news like this, they'll say "Hmm, so this Linux OS is just now getting this game? It must really be behind the times!"
2) To promote Linux as a gaming platform is to promote it as a "toy OS." Yes, I'm aware that Windows is heavily promoted as a gaming platform, but how many technically-savvy people would consider it anything less than a toy OS? Windows at least has the strength of having the "heavyweight" office automation package. If the average guy on the street asks what software is available for Linux, what do you say? "Quake III and Emacs?" We can't have the only high-visibility software for Linux be game software, because then Linux becomes a toy OS.
I think we would do well to avoid having these two misconceptions forced upon Linux. Linux already suffers from the perception of being an operating system that is targeted primarily at political leftists; it would be a shame if we had to add on two more ridiculous and hateful suggestions. I, like most Slashdot readers, love Linux. I know that "Linux is yesterday's technology" is bullshit. I know that "Linux is a toy OS is bullshit." So let's not encourage anything that would lead people to think otherwise, mmmkay?
I'll grant you, it's usb and not Firewire, but all technologies can't be lucky enough to have been invented by Apple.
If it had been Apple's, then you know it would've done better. Sure, Intel has a vested interest in promoting USB, and sure, Intel is a pretty big company. But as big as Apple? Not by a long shot.
You see, company size can't just be measured in terms of assets or market cap. It has to be measured in terms of love and caring. It has to be measured in terms of how many partisan zealots are clamoring to fight for the fatherland, and Apple takes the cake by far. There may be fewer mac users than Wintel users, but they're a whole lot more rabid. When you do something wrong (even if it was right and they just think it was wrong), then they'll let you know. Mac users are like that.
How does this bode for USB 2.0?
Well, if they want USB to succeed, then they'll have to bring it in line with Apple's standards, both of technical and cultural means. For one thing, they'll have to make it a lot more expensive. People are sheep and unwilling to invest in a technology that doesn't cost through the nose. (Just look at Microsoft or VA Linux if you want to know what I mean.)
They'll also want to start vending it in twenty shades of pastel. People are sheep and unwilling to invest in a technology that doesn't put their children's Barbie collections to shame in sugary rainbow gawdiness. It's a fact.
But most importantly, they will have to emulate Apple's exceptional and successful marketing techniques. Remember when Apple scortched Intel's bunny ads? That was hilarious. Intel will have to come out with a campaign that really demonstrates why you should use USB. They'll have to use a lot of nudity, and more importantly, they'll have to use celebrity nudity. A pinup photo spread of Albert Einstein covering his delicate genitalia with an assortment of grapes (each painted a different color to represent the different available USB colors as discussed above) with the slogan "USB: Yowzers" would go a long way towards bringing USB in line with Apple's projected growth.
But most importantly of all, USB has to kill all its competition. We can't allow market inefficiencies to set in when multiple redundant technologies are being used across the industry. That's just wasteful. Apple learned this years ago when they killed the more successful Nubus in favor of their own proprietary PCI specification, and they haven't looked back. Unfortunately, the Wintel players haven't yet caught on to Apple's brilliant strategies, so they might be a little slower in turning the tables by killing up ASB. But if our economy is to grow into the next couple decades, we have to trim down our wastrel occupations and allow innovation to flourish.
Slashdot Mirror
their failures have nothing to do their ideology and everything to do with the fact that banner ads just don't support a website unless they're porn ads.
But this is easily falsifiable. I've already mentioned WorldNetDaily, a publication that finances itself through banner ads. I read the site hourly to make sure that I am informed on what is going on in the world, and I can guarantee you that I have never seen a "porn ad." Not once. So your statement that banner ads can't support a website has been dealt with and dimissed.
I think what you mean to say is that banner ads can support a site if there are enough page views. You get page views by having scintillating content. You get them by publishing things that people want to read. People should not be surprised that they cannot generate page views with the horrors of liberalism! WorldNetDaily succeeds because there is a large audience of people who do not want their news sanitized for them, people who want the honest truth about the socialist and homosexual communities. The audience for the type of material served up by Salon, on the other hand, has dwindled into nothingness.
The primary reason that Salon and Slate and other "Web magazines" is not that there is something inherently wrong with the format. The problem is that people are starting to reject the content. Salon and Slate are well-known unapologetic mouthpieces of the liberal left, and poll after poll is showing that Americans are increasingly not interested in liberalism. With conservatives running the show in Washington, the country is beginning to gravitate back towards its moral roots. The few Americans that do admit to liberalism are not even close to the number that would be required to keep Salon afloat (through ad revenue or any other means.) If you have no readers, you cannot possibly succeed.
Take a look at WorldNetDaily, a popular mainstream news outlet/magazine. WND is consistently voted the best site on the Web, and is going strong even as leftist sites crumble down around it. The point is that Web journalism is alive and well (and in fact, doing better than it ever has done before.) The fact that some of the old standbys are dying out is just a natural part of information evolution; it is the wheat being separated from the chaff.
True, but that does not mean the people have to buy it.
I didn't say that they did. If there was another American company that offered similar software and services, people could buy that. That's not the point. The point is that Wurzler is essentially rewarding people for using an OS whose socioeconomic philosophy is decidedly un-American. On Memorial Day, I find it indefensible to be celebrating the basic ideas that hundreds of thousands of American servicemen have given their lives to defend the country against.
Or are you just trying to be funny?
No, I'm not trying to be funny. I'm just sick and tired of the liberal elite position of "bash the military" and "screw the veterans." I am proud to say that I answered my country's call in Operation Desert Storm, as did thousands of other brave Americans. I interpret Wurzler's inexcusable bias against Microsoft as a swipe at American values and at the things that this country stands for. I also have the right to free speech, as afforded me by the United States constitution. If you don't like it, tough titty (as the kitty is reputed to have said.)
It seems to me that Wurlzer has fallen victim to some of the FUD that has been spread by Linux advocates. Despite what these people say, most of the crap that they've been flinging around is just plain baseless. I'll be called a "Microsoft shill" or an "astroturfer", but truth is truth: Microsoft's latest server offerings are extremely secure, scalable, and reliable. It seems to me that a lot of these OSS advocates have this "Windows 3.1" mentality about Microsoft. Windows advocates are willing to admit that Linux has gotten better over the years .. why aren't Linux advocates prepared to admit the same thing about Microsoft?
.. I'm just sick of the blatant anti-Microsoft bias that Slashdot displays time and time again.
Look, if you want to use Linux or *BSD or some other non-mainstream OS to host your Web site, then great. That's your choice. But what Wurzler is doing here is essentially punishing people (fining them, as it were) for making a responsible choice to use the products and services offered by one of America's most important flagship companies. The way that America works is that people get together and work hard to put out a product, and then they sell it to people. It is particularly sickening that this news is being reported on Memorial Day, the day that we are supposed to be remembering the sacrifices that our servicemen gave for our way of life. The Wurzler bozos might as well spit in the collective faces of all of our country's veterans of war.
Has anybody considered holding Congressional oversight meetings on these people? It's interesting how they are unwilling to increase premiums on Linux users to deal with security issues and source code forking and the other (very real) risks of using this OS. Instead, what they do is punish people for making the choice that has been proven time and time again to lower the total cost of ownership. Go ahead and flame me
All right, how is Linux "targeted primarily at political leftists?"
.. but still, there was some sort of primal guilt that I was powerless to overcome. I keep telling myself that using Linux is not going to turn me into a leftist, but some irrational part of me (that part of the brain that invents monsters under the bed, no doubt) is working overtime to convince me otherwise.
.. I should have left the comment out altogether. It doesn't change my basic position, though. Linux is a serious OS, and anybody that has ever used it is well aware of that. We need to be doing whatever is possible to reinforce its image as a serious OS. Gaming news doesn't help that goal (IMHO.)
Well, maybe this was a bit strongly-worded. But it doesn't take a world-renowned detective to figure out that a lot of the hard-line, anti-corporate, Seattle-protester types are big into Linux. This does not help Linux's public image, IMHO. On top of that, there was the unfortunate (and IMHO hateful) story that Slashdot ran about how Linux was supposed to become the offical OS of the People's Republic of China.
As I write this we can all be thankful that our servicemen are on their way home from China. But I have to admit that I felt a bit guilty booting into Linux, knowing that those innocent people were being held hostage, while at the same time I was using their captors' favorite OS without giving it a second thought. I know this is silly; "one thing has nothing to do with the other", as they say
At any rate, you're right
Okay, you're right. When I said "these games" I really meant "a lot of the other games that have been released for Linux." I didn't mean to suggest that Tribes 2 was old .. apologies if I implied otherwise (and reading what I wrote, I did.)
.. DOOM was a great game, perhaps among the best ever, but Joe Sixpack is going to get the wrong impression from this. IMHO we don't need this.
.. isn't that what a console, a big-screen TV, and 600 watts of Surround Sound are for?
But for an example of what I mean by "a lot of the other games", take DOOM. There was a big hubbub about id Software releasing and opening up DOOM for Linux, and this was years after the height of its popularity. Again, don't get me wrong
I've never understood why people go for PC gaming anyway
Am I the only one that is not necessarily pleased by this whole "games for Linux" phenomenon? In my opinion, news like this actually hurts Linux, for at least a couple of reasons:
1) These games are old. Sorry, but Alpha Centauri? Look, you don't need to convince me it was a great game, but the key word there is "was!" When people on the street see news like this, they'll say "Hmm, so this Linux OS is just now getting this game? It must really be behind the times!"
2) To promote Linux as a gaming platform is to promote it as a "toy OS." Yes, I'm aware that Windows is heavily promoted as a gaming platform, but how many technically-savvy people would consider it anything less than a toy OS? Windows at least has the strength of having the "heavyweight" office automation package. If the average guy on the street asks what software is available for Linux, what do you say? "Quake III and Emacs?" We can't have the only high-visibility software for Linux be game software, because then Linux becomes a toy OS.
I think we would do well to avoid having these two misconceptions forced upon Linux. Linux already suffers from the perception of being an operating system that is targeted primarily at political leftists; it would be a shame if we had to add on two more ridiculous and hateful suggestions. I, like most Slashdot readers, love Linux. I know that "Linux is yesterday's technology" is bullshit. I know that "Linux is a toy OS is bullshit." So let's not encourage anything that would lead people to think otherwise, mmmkay?
I'll grant you, it's usb and not Firewire, but all technologies can't be lucky enough to have been invented by Apple.
If it had been Apple's, then you know it would've done better. Sure, Intel has a vested interest in promoting USB, and sure, Intel is a pretty big company. But as big as Apple? Not by a long shot.
You see, company size can't just be measured in terms of assets or market cap. It has to be measured in terms of love and caring. It has to be measured in terms of how many partisan zealots are clamoring to fight for the fatherland, and Apple takes the cake by far. There may be fewer mac users than Wintel users, but they're a whole lot more rabid. When you do something wrong (even if it was right and they just think it was wrong), then they'll let you know. Mac users are like that.
How does this bode for USB 2.0?
Well, if they want USB to succeed, then they'll have to bring it in line with Apple's standards, both of technical and cultural means. For one thing, they'll have to make it a lot more expensive. People are sheep and unwilling to invest in a technology that doesn't cost through the nose. (Just look at Microsoft or VA Linux if you want to know what I mean.)
They'll also want to start vending it in twenty shades of pastel. People are sheep and unwilling to invest in a technology that doesn't put their children's Barbie collections to shame in sugary rainbow gawdiness. It's a fact.
But most importantly, they will have to emulate Apple's exceptional and successful marketing techniques. Remember when Apple scortched Intel's bunny ads? That was hilarious. Intel will have to come out with a campaign that really demonstrates why you should use USB. They'll have to use a lot of nudity, and more importantly, they'll have to use celebrity nudity. A pinup photo spread of Albert Einstein covering his delicate genitalia with an assortment of grapes (each painted a different color to represent the different available USB colors as discussed above) with the slogan "USB: Yowzers" would go a long way towards bringing USB in line with Apple's projected growth.
But most importantly of all, USB has to kill all its competition. We can't allow market inefficiencies to set in when multiple redundant technologies are being used across the industry. That's just wasteful. Apple learned this years ago when they killed the more successful Nubus in favor of their own proprietary PCI specification, and they haven't looked back. Unfortunately, the Wintel players haven't yet caught on to Apple's brilliant strategies, so they might be a little slower in turning the tables by killing up ASB. But if our economy is to grow into the next couple decades, we have to trim down our wastrel occupations and allow innovation to flourish.
Only through these means shall USB reign supreme.